Literature DB >> 26060094

Multiscale Predictors of Femoral Neck In Situ Strength in Aging Women: Contributions of BMD, Cortical Porosity, Reference Point Indentation, and Nonenzymatic Glycation.

Adam C Abraham1, Avinesh Agarwalla2, Aditya Yadavalli2, Christopher McAndrew1, Jenny Y Liu1, Simon Y Tang1,2,3.   

Abstract

The diagnosis of fracture risk relies almost solely on quantifying bone mass, yet bone strength is governed by factors at multiple scales including composition and structure that contribute to fracture resistance. Furthermore, aging and conditions such as diabetes mellitus alter fracture incidence independently of bone mass. Therefore, it is critical to incorporate other factors that contribute to bone strength in order to improve diagnostic specificity of fracture risk. We examined the correlation between femoral neck fracture strength in aging female cadavers and areal bone mineral density, along with other clinically accessible measures of bone quality including whole-bone cortical porosity (Ct.Po), bone material mechanical behavior measured by reference point indentation (RPI), and accumulation of advanced glycation end-products (AGEs). All measurements were found to be significant predictors of femoral neck fracture strength, with areal bone mineral density (aBMD) being the single strongest correlate (aBMD: r = 0.755, p < 0.001; Ct.Po: r = -0.500, p < 0.001; RPI: r = -0.478, p < 0.001; AGEs: r = -0.336, p = 0.016). RPI-derived measurements were not correlated with tissue mineral density or local cortical porosity as confirmed by micro-computed tomography (μCT). Multiple reverse stepwise regression revealed that the inclusion of aBMD and any other factor significantly improve the prediction of bone strength over univariate predictions. Combining bone assays at multiple scales such as aBMD with tibial Ct.Po (r = 0.835; p < 0.001), tibial difference in indentation depth between the first and 20th cycle (IDI) (r = 0.883; p < 0.001), or tibial AGEs (r = 0.822; p < 0.001) significantly improves the prediction of femoral neck strength over any factor alone, suggesting that this personalized approach could greatly enhance bone strength and fracture risk assessment with the potential to guide clinical management strategies for at-risk populations.
© 2015 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BONE MINERAL DENSITY; BONE QUALITY; BONE STRENGTH; DXA; HIP FRACTURE; POSTMENOPAUSAL OSTEOPOROSIS

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26060094      PMCID: PMC4673035          DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.2568

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


  57 in total

1.  Influence of nonenzymatic glycation on biomechanical properties of cortical bone.

Authors:  D Vashishth; G J Gibson; J I Khoury; M B Schaffler; J Kimura; D P Fyhrie
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Effects of non-enzymatic glycation on cancellous bone fragility.

Authors:  S Y Tang; U Zeenath; D Vashishth
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 3.  The role of the collagen matrix in skeletal fragility.

Authors:  Deepak Vashishth
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.096

4.  High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging: three-dimensional trabecular bone architecture and biomechanical properties.

Authors:  S Majumdar; M Kothari; P Augat; D C Newitt; T M Link; J C Lin; T Lang; Y Lu; H K Genant
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Reference-point indentation correlates with bone toughness assessed using whole-bone traditional mechanical testing.

Authors:  Maxime A Gallant; Drew M Brown; Jason M Organ; Matthew R Allen; David B Burr
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 4.398

6.  Predictive geometric factors in a standardized model of femoral neck fracture. Experimental study of cadaveric human femurs.

Authors:  C Kukla; C Gaebler; R W Pichl; R Prokesch; G Heinze; T Heinz
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.586

7.  Cortical porosity identifies women with osteopenia at increased risk for forearm fractures.

Authors:  Yohann Bala; Roger Zebaze; Ali Ghasem-Zadeh; Elizabeth J Atkinson; Sandra Iuliano; James M Peterson; Shreyasee Amin; Åshild Bjørnerem; L Joseph Melton; Helena Johansson; John A Kanis; Sundeep Khosla; Ego Seeman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  The associations between QCT-based vertebral bone measurements and prevalent vertebral fractures depend on the spinal locations of both bone measurement and fracture.

Authors:  D E Anderson; S Demissie; B T Allaire; A G Bruno; D L Kopperdahl; T M Keaveny; D P Kiel; M L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 9.  Is a change in bone mineral density a sensitive and specific surrogate of anti-fracture efficacy?

Authors:  E Seeman
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2007-06-26       Impact factor: 4.398

10.  Time trends and demography of mortality after fractured neck of femur in an English population, 1968-98: database study.

Authors:  Stephen E Roberts; Michael J Goldacre
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-10-04
View more
  24 in total

1.  Duration of anti-resorptive therapy for osteoporosis.

Authors:  Robert A Adler
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 3.633

2.  Increasing fluoride content deteriorates rat bone mechanical properties.

Authors:  Taraneh Rezaee; Mary L Bouxsein; Lamya Karim
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2020-04-19       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Local bone quality measurements correlates with maximum screw torque at the femoral diaphysis.

Authors:  Christopher M McAndrew; Avinesh Agarwalla; Adam C Abraham; Eric Feuchtbaum; William M Ricci; Simon Y Tang
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2018-02-03       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 4.  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

Review 5.  Clinical Evaluation of Bone Strength and Fracture Risk.

Authors:  Chantal M J de Bakker; Wei-Ju Tseng; Yihan Li; Hongbo Zhao; X Sherry Liu
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 5.096

6.  Factors associated with proximal femur fracture determined in a large cadaveric cohort.

Authors:  Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Timothy L Rossman; Asghar Rezaei; Kent D Carlson; David F Kallmes; John A Skinner; Sundeep Khosla; Shreyasee Amin
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 4.398

7.  External bone size identifies different strength-decline trajectories for the male human femora.

Authors:  Morgan W Bolger; Genevieve E Romanowicz; Erin M R Bigelow; Ferrous S Ward; Antonio Ciarelli; Karl J Jepsen; David H Kohn
Journal:  J Struct Biol       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 2.867

8.  Prevalent role of porosity and osteonal area over mineralization heterogeneity in the fracture toughness of human cortical bone.

Authors:  Mathilde Granke; Alexander J Makowski; Sasidhar Uppuganti; Jeffry S Nyman
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Microstructural and compositional contributions towards the mechanical behavior of aging human bone measured by cyclic and impact reference point indentation.

Authors:  Adam C Abraham; Avinesh Agarwalla; Aditya Yadavalli; Jenny Y Liu; Simon Y Tang
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 10.  Tissue-Level Mechanical Properties of Bone Contributing to Fracture Risk.

Authors:  Jeffry S Nyman; Mathilde Granke; Robert C Singleton; George M Pharr
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 5.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.