Renata C Pereira1, David S Bischoff2, Dean Yamaguchi2, Isidro B Salusky1, Katherine Wesseling-Perry3. 1. Department of Pediatrics, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; and. 2. Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Sepulveda and David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 3. Department of Pediatrics, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; and kwesseling@mednet.ucla.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Computed tomography (CT) measurements can distinguish between cortical and trabecular bone density in vivo. High-resolution CTs assess both bone volume and density in the same compartment, thus potentially yielding information regarding bone mineralization as well. The relationship between bone histomorphometric parameters of skeletal mineralization and bone density from microcomputed tomography (μCT) measurements of bone cores from patients on dialysis has not been assessed. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Bone cores from 68 patients with ESRD (age =13.9±0.5 years old; 50% men) and 14 controls (age =15.3±3.8 years old; 50% men) obtained as part of research protocols between 1983 and 2006 were analyzed by bone histomorphometry and μCT. RESULTS: Bone histomorphometric diagnoses in the patients were normal to high bone turnover in 76%, adynamic bone in 13%, and osteomalacia in 11%. Bone formation rate did not correlate with any μCT determinations. Bone volume measurements were highly correlated between bone histomorphometry and μCT (bone volume/tissue volume between the two techniques: r=0.70; P<0.001, trabecular thickness and trabecular separation: r=0.71; P<0.001, and r=0.56; P<0.001, respectively). Osteoid accumulation as determined by bone histomorphometry correlated inversely with bone mineral density as assessed by μCT (osteoid thickness: r=-0.32; P=0.01 and osteoid volume: r=-0.28; P=0.05). By multivariable analysis, the combination of bone mineral density and bone volume (as assessed by μCT) along with parathyroid hormone and calcium levels accounted for 38% of the variability in osteoid volume (by histomorphometry). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of bone volume can be accurately assessed with μCT. Bone mineral density is lower in patients with excessive osteoid accumulation and higher in patients with adynamic, well mineralized bone. Thus, bone mineralization may be accurately assessed by μCT of bone biopsy cores. Additional studies are warranted to define the value of high-resolution CT in the prediction of bone mineralization in vivo.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Computed tomography (CT) measurements can distinguish between cortical and trabecular bone density in vivo. High-resolution CTs assess both bone volume and density in the same compartment, thus potentially yielding information regarding bone mineralization as well. The relationship between bone histomorphometric parameters of skeletal mineralization and bone density from microcomputed tomography (μCT) measurements of bone cores from patients on dialysis has not been assessed. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Bone cores from 68 patients with ESRD (age =13.9±0.5 years old; 50% men) and 14 controls (age =15.3±3.8 years old; 50% men) obtained as part of research protocols between 1983 and 2006 were analyzed by bone histomorphometry and μCT. RESULTS: Bone histomorphometric diagnoses in the patients were normal to high bone turnover in 76%, adynamic bone in 13%, and osteomalacia in 11%. Bone formation rate did not correlate with any μCT determinations. Bone volume measurements were highly correlated between bone histomorphometry and μCT (bone volume/tissue volume between the two techniques: r=0.70; P<0.001, trabecular thickness and trabecular separation: r=0.71; P<0.001, and r=0.56; P<0.001, respectively). Osteoid accumulation as determined by bone histomorphometry correlated inversely with bone mineral density as assessed by μCT (osteoid thickness: r=-0.32; P=0.01 and osteoid volume: r=-0.28; P=0.05). By multivariable analysis, the combination of bone mineral density and bone volume (as assessed by μCT) along with parathyroid hormone and calcium levels accounted for 38% of the variability in osteoid volume (by histomorphometry). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of bone volume can be accurately assessed with μCT. Bone mineral density is lower in patients with excessive osteoid accumulation and higher in patients with adynamic, well mineralized bone. Thus, bone mineralization may be accurately assessed by μCT of bone biopsy cores. Additional studies are warranted to define the value of high-resolution CT in the prediction of bone mineralization in vivo.
Authors: Jaap W Groothoff; Martin Offringa; Berthe L F Van Eck-Smit; Mariken P Gruppen; Nicole J Van De Kar; Eric D Wolff; Marc R Lilien; Jean Claude Davin; Hugo S A Heymans; Friedo W Dekker Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: A M Parfitt; M K Drezner; F H Glorieux; J A Kanis; H Malluche; P J Meunier; S M Ott; R R Recker Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 1987-12 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: B M Misof; D W Dempster; Hua Zhou; P Roschger; N Fratzl-Zelman; P Fratzl; S J Silverberg; E Shane; A Cohen; E Stein; T L Nickolas; R R Recker; J Lappe; J P Bilezikian; K Klaushofer Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Babul Borah; Erik L Ritman; Thomas E Dufresne; Steven M Jorgensen; Sheng Liu; Jarek Sacha; Roger J Phipps; Russell T Turner Journal: Bone Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: J Ciaran Hutchinson; Susan C Shelmerdine; Ian C Simcock; Neil J Sebire; Owen J Arthurs Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: I D B Marques; M J C L N Araújo; F G Graciolli; L M Dos Reis; R M Pereira; M R Custódio; V Jorgetti; R M Elias; E David-Neto; R M A Moysés Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Rachel M Holden; Reem A Mustafa; R Todd Alexander; Marisa Battistella; Micheli U Bevilacqua; Greg Knoll; Fabrice Mac-Way; Martina Reslerova; Ron Wald; Philip D Acott; Patrick Feltmate; Allan Grill; Kailash K Jindal; Meena Karsanji; Bryce A Kiberd; Sara Mahdavi; Kailee McCarron; Amber O Molnar; Maury Pinsk; Celia Rodd; Steven D Soroka; Amanda J Vinson; Deborah Zimmerman; Catherine M Clase Journal: Can J Kidney Health Dis Date: 2020-08-04
Authors: A D Lalayiannis; N J Crabtree; M Fewtrell; L Biassoni; D V Milford; C J Ferro; R Shroff Journal: Pediatr Nephrol Date: 2019-06-25 Impact factor: 3.714
Authors: Ana Pimentel; Pablo Ureña-Torres; Jordi Bover; Jose Luis Fernandez-Martín; Martine Cohen-Solal Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2020-11-21 Impact factor: 4.333