UNLABELLED: This study evaluated side-to-side differences in tibial mineral mass and geometry in women with previous hip fracture sustained on average 3.5 years earlier. Both tibial mineral mass and geometry were found to be reduced in the fractured leg. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate side-to-side differences in tibial mineral mass and geometry after hip fracture and to assess the determinants of such differences. METHODS:Thirty-eight60- to 85-year-old women with a previous hip fracture and 22 same-aged control women without fractures participated in the study. Bone characteristics of the distal tibia and tibial shaft of both legs were assessed using pQCT in order to compare the side-to-side differences of tibias between the two groups. RESULTS: The subjects with fracture history had significantly (p < OR = 0.05, analysis of covariance) larger side-to-side differences than the controls in tibial shaft BMC (-4.9% vs. -0.5%), cortical area (-5.2% vs. 0.1%) and polar moment of inertia (I(polar)) (-5.6% vs. -0.8%) and in distal tibia BMC (-5.1% vs. -1.4%) and I(polar) (-7.5% vs. -2.4%). In the fracture patients, the side-to-side differences in muscle characteristics explained 23 to 44% of the variances in the side-to-side differences in bone mass and geometry. CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture results in reduced bone mass and impaired bone geometry in the tibia of the affected limb in older women. Muscle-induced loading may have a considerable role in the recovery of bone mineral mass and geometry after hip fracture.
RCT Entities:
UNLABELLED: This study evaluated side-to-side differences in tibial mineral mass and geometry in women with previous hip fracture sustained on average 3.5 years earlier. Both tibial mineral mass and geometry were found to be reduced in the fractured leg. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate side-to-side differences in tibial mineral mass and geometry after hip fracture and to assess the determinants of such differences. METHODS: Thirty-eight 60- to 85-year-old women with a previous hip fracture and 22 same-aged control women without fractures participated in the study. Bone characteristics of the distal tibia and tibial shaft of both legs were assessed using pQCT in order to compare the side-to-side differences of tibias between the two groups. RESULTS: The subjects with fracture history had significantly (p < OR = 0.05, analysis of covariance) larger side-to-side differences than the controls in tibial shaft BMC (-4.9% vs. -0.5%), cortical area (-5.2% vs. 0.1%) and polar moment of inertia (I(polar)) (-5.6% vs. -0.8%) and in distal tibia BMC (-5.1% vs. -1.4%) and I(polar) (-7.5% vs. -2.4%). In the fracturepatients, the side-to-side differences in muscle characteristics explained 23 to 44% of the variances in the side-to-side differences in bone mass and geometry. CONCLUSIONS:Hip fracture results in reduced bone mass and impaired bone geometry in the tibia of the affected limb in older women. Muscle-induced loading may have a considerable role in the recovery of bone mineral mass and geometry after hip fracture.
Authors: Henrik G Ahlborg; Olof Johnell; Charles H Turner; Gunnar Rannevik; Magnus K Karlsson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Cathleen Colón-Emeric; Maragatha Kuchibhatla; Carl Pieper; William Hawkes; Lisa Fredman; Jay Magaziner; Sheryl Zimmerman; Kenneth W Lyles Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-10-03 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Ram R Miller; Marty Eastlack; Gregory E Hicks; Dawn E Alley; Michelle D Shardell; Denise L Orwig; Bret H Goodpaster; Peter J Chomentowski; William G Hawkes; Marc C Hochberg; Luigi Ferrucci; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-05-11 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Ram R Miller; Marty Eastlack; Gregory E Hicks; Dawn E Alley; Michelle D Shardell; Denise L Orwig; Bret H Goodpaster; Peter J Chomentowski; William G Hawkes; Marc C Hochberg; Luigi Ferrucci; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: L Reider; T J Beck; M C Hochberg; W G Hawkes; D Orwig; J A YuYahiro; J R Hebel; J Magaziner Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2009-07-02 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Yahtyng Sheu; Joseph M Zmuda; Robert M Boudreau; Moira A Petit; Kristine E Ensrud; Douglas C Bauer; Christopher L Gordon; Eric S Orwoll; Jane A Cauley Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Sarianna Sipilä; Anu Salpakoski; Johanna Edgren; Ari Heinonen; Markku A Kauppinen; Marja Arkela-Kautiainen; Sanna E Sihvonen; Maija Pesola; Taina Rantanen; Mauri Kallinen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: A E Litwic; M Clynes; H J Denison; K A Jameson; M H Edwards; A A Sayer; P Taylor; C Cooper; E M Dennison Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2015-11-21 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Tuuli H Suominen; Johanna Edgren; Anu Salpakoski; Mauri Kallinen; Tomas Cervinka; Timo Rantalainen; Timo Törmäkangas; Ari Heinonen; Sarianna Sipilä Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 2.362