Literature DB >> 26133256

The distribution of bone mass in the lumbar vertebrae: are we measuring the right target?

Yue Wang1, Tapio Videman2, Steven K Boyd3, Michele C Battié4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The ideal target of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements of the spine is the trabecula-rich vertebral body. Yet, spine BMD measurements routinely obtained with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry also include the posterior elements of the vertebra, which are mainly cortical bone and insensitive to bone loss.
PURPOSE: We compared the bone mass of the vertebral body and posterior elements to determine the contributions of vertebral components to vertebral BMD measurements. STUDY
DESIGN: A micro-computed tomography study of lumbar vertebral bone.
METHODS: From a spine archive, 144 cadaveric lumbar vertebrae (L1-L5) from 48 male human spines (mean age, 50 years) were scanned in air using micro-computed tomography to measure bone volume, bone mineral content (BMC) and BMD of the vertebral body, posterior elements, and entire vertebra. The contributions of the vertebral components to the total vertebral BMC and volume were compared, and the correlations between the BMC and BMD of the vertebrae and their components were examined.
RESULTS: Overall, the vertebral body contributed about one-third of the total vertebral BMC and two-thirds of the total vertebral volume, and the posterior elements contributed the remainder. The vertebral body BMC and BMD were poorly correlated to those of the posterior elements (r=0.39 for BMC and r=0.34 for BMD, p<.0001) and moderately correlated to the whole vertebra (r=0.77 and 0.75, respectively, p<.0001). The BMC and BMD of the posterior elements and whole vertebra were more strongly correlated (r=0.89 and 0.84, respectively, p<.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The posterior elements are the primary contributor to vertebral BMC and BMD measurements. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry spine BMD measurements are likely to be more representative of the posterior elements than the targeted vertebral body. The findings elucidate the extent of the limitation of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry spine BMD measurements.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone mineral density; DXA; Lumbar spine; Osteoporosis; Vertebra; μCT

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26133256     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.06.059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  4 in total

1.  The Pedicles Are Not the Densest Regions of the Lumbar Vertebrae: Implications for Bone Quality Assessment and Surgical Treatment Strategy.

Authors:  Eric A Hohn; Bryant Chu; Audrey Martin; Elizabeth Yu; Connor Telles; Jeremi Leasure; Tennyson L Lynch; Dimitriy Kondrashov
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-04-11

2.  Bone mineral density assessment using iterative reconstruction compared with quantitative computed tomography as the standard of reference.

Authors:  Constanze Mann; Katharina Ziegeler; Jürgen Mews; Martina Plaschke; Ahi Sema Issever
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Comparison of the Pull-Out Strength between a Novel Micro-Dynamic Pedicle Screw and a Traditional Pedicle Screw in Lumbar Spine.

Authors:  Lei Qian; Weidong Chen; Peng Li; Dongbin Qu; Wenjie Liang; Minghui Zheng; Jun Ouyang
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2020-08-09       Impact factor: 2.071

4.  Pedicle Screws Challenged: Lumbar Cortical Density and Thickness Are Greater in the Posterior Elements Than in the Pedicles.

Authors:  Khalid Odeh; Alexander Rosinski; Jeremi Leasure; Dimitriy Kondrashov
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-11-22
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.