Literature DB >> 17002580

Bone fragility: failure of periosteal apposition to compensate for increased endocortical resorption in postmenopausal women.

Pawel Szulc1, Ego Seeman, François Duboeuf, Elisabeth Sornay-Rendu, Pierre D Delmas.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The increase in bone fragility after menopause results from reduced periosteal bone formation and increased endocortical resorption. Women with highest remodeling had greatest loss of bone mass and estimated bone strength, whereas those with low remodeling lost less bone and maintained estimated bone strength.
INTRODUCTION: Bone loss from the inner (endocortical) surface contributes to bone fragility, whereas deposition of bone on the outer (periosteal) surface is believed to be an adaptive response to maintain resistance to bending.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To test this hypothesis, changes in bone mass and estimated indices of bone geometry and strength of the one-third distal radius, bone turnover markers, and fracture incidence were measured annually in 821 women 30-89 years of age for 7.1 +/- 2.5 years. The analyses were made in 151 premenopausal women, 33 perimenopausal women, 279 postmenopausal women, and 72 postmenopausal women receiving hormone replacement therapy (HRT).
RESULTS: In premenopausal women, periosteal apposition increased the radius width, partly offsetting endocortical resorption; therefore, the estimated cortical thickness decreased. Outward displacement of the thinner cortex maintained bone mass and cortical area and increased estimated bending strength. Estimated endocortical resorption accelerated during perimenopause, whereas periosteal apposition decreased. Further cortical thinning occurred, but estimated bending strength was maintained by modest outward cortical displacement. Endocortical resorption accelerated further during the postmenopausal years, whereas periosteal apposition declined further; cortices thinned, but because outward displacement was minimal, estimated cortical area and bending strength now decreased. Women with highest remodeling had the greatest loss of bone mass and strength. Women with low remodeling lost less bone and maintained estimated bone strength. In HRT-treated women, loss of bone strength was partly prevented. These structural indices predicted incident fractures; a 1 SD lower section modulus doubled fracture risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Periosteal apposition does not increase after menopause to compensate for bone loss; it decreases. Bone fragility of osteoporosis is a consequence of reduced periosteal bone formation and increased endocortical resorption. Understanding the mechanisms of the age-related decline in periosteal apposition will identify new therapeutic targets. On the basis of our results, it may be speculated that the stimulation of periosteal apposition will increase bone width and improve skeletal strength.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17002580     DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.060904

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  73 in total

Review 1.  Functional interactions among morphologic and tissue quality traits define bone quality.

Authors:  Karl J Jepsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Long-term effect of aromatase inhibitors on bone microarchitecture and macroarchitecture in non-osteoporotic postmenopausal women with breast cancer.

Authors:  A R Hong; J H Kim; K H Lee; T Y Kim; S A Im; T Y Kim; H G Moon; W S Han; D Y Noh; S W Kim; C S Shin
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Femoral Neck External Size but not aBMD Predicts Structural and Mass Changes for Women Transitioning Through Menopause.

Authors:  Karl J Jepsen; Andrew Kozminski; Erin Mr Bigelow; Stephen H Schlecht; Robert W Goulet; Sioban D Harlow; Jane A Cauley; Carrie Karvonen-Gutierrez
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 4.  The periosteum--a surface for all seasons.

Authors:  E Seeman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 5.  The multiple facets of periostin in bone metabolism.

Authors:  B Merle; P Garnero
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  The amount of periosteal apposition required to maintain bone strength during aging depends on adult bone morphology and tissue-modulus degradation rate.

Authors:  Karl J Jepsen; Nelly Andarawis-Puri
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 7.  Genetics of aging bone.

Authors:  Douglas J Adams; David W Rowe; Cheryl L Ackert-Bicknell
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 2.957

8.  Longitudinal changes in BMD and bone geometry in a population-based study.

Authors:  Fulvio Lauretani; Stefania Bandinelli; Michael E Griswold; Marcello Maggio; Richard Semba; Jack M Guralnik; Luigi Ferrucci
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Dissimilarity of femur aging in men and women from a Nationwide Survey in Korea (KNHANES IV).

Authors:  Kyoung Min Kim; Jung Soo Lim; Kwang Joon Kim; Han Seok Choi; Yumie Rhee; Han Jin Oh; Hoon Choi; Woong Hwan Choi; Jung Gu Kim; Sung-Kil Lim
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 2.626

10.  Difference in the trajectory of change in bone geometry as measured by hip structural analysis in the narrow neck, intertrochanteric region, and femoral shaft between men and women following hip fracture.

Authors:  Alan M Rathbun; Michelle Shardell; Denise Orwig; J Richard Hebel; Gregory E Hicks; Thomas J Beck; Jay Magaziner; Marc C Hochberg
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 4.398

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.