Literature DB >> 27569519

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.

Alan M Rathbun1, Michelle Shardell2, Denise Orwig3, J Richard Hebel3, Gregory E Hicks4, Thomas J Beck5, Jay Magaziner3, Marc C Hochberg3.   

Abstract

Prior studies have shown that women have declines in bone structure and strength after hip fracture, but it is unclear whether men sustain similar changes. Therefore, the objective was to examine sex differences in proximal femur geometry following hip fracture. Hip structural analysis was used to derive metrics of bone structure and strength: aerial bone mineral density, cross-sectional bone area (CSA), cortical outer diameter, section modulus (SM), and buckling ratio (BR) from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans performed at baseline (within 22days of hospital admission), two, six, or twelve months after hip fracture in men and women (n=282) enrolled in the Baltimore Hip Studies 7th cohort. Weighted estimating equations were used to evaluate sex differences at the narrow neck (NN), intertrochanteric (IT), and femoral shaft (FS). Men had significantly different one year NN changes compared to women in CSA: -6.33% (-12.47, -0.20) vs. 1.37% (-3.31, 6.43), P=0.049; SM: -4.98% (-11.08, 1.10) vs. 3.94% (-2.51, 10.42), P=0.042; and BR: 7.50% (0.65, 14.36) vs. -1.20% (-6.41, 4.00), P=0.044. One year IT changes displayed similar patterns, but the sex differences were not statistically significant for CSA: -4.07% (-10.83, 2.67) vs. 0.41% (-3.41, 4.24), P=0.252; SM: -4.78% (-12.10, 5.53) vs. -0.31 (-4.74, 4.11), P=0.287; and BR: 4.59% (-0.65, 9.84) vs. 1.52% (-4.23, 7.28), P=0.425. Differences in FS geometric parameters were even smaller in magnitude and not significantly different by sex. Women generally experienced non-significant increases in bone tissue and strength following hip fracture, while men had structural declines that were statistically greater at the NN region. Reductions in the mechanical strength of the proximal femur after hip fracture could put men at higher risk for subsequent fractures of the contralateral hip.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging; DXA; Fracture prevention; Injury/fracture healing; Osteoporosis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27569519      PMCID: PMC5056832          DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2016.08.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  48 in total

1.  Exercise behavior in a community sample with diabetes: understanding the determinants of exercise behavioral change.

Authors:  R C Plotnikoff; S Brez; S B Hotz
Journal:  Diabetes Educ       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.140

2.  Bone mineral density, soft tissue body composition, strength, and functioning after hip fracture.

Authors:  Lois E Wehren; William G Hawkes; J Richard Hebel; Denise L Orwig; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 6.053

3.  Sex differences in geometry of the femoral neck with aging: a structural analysis of bone mineral data.

Authors:  T J Beck; C B Ruff; W W Scott; C C Plato; J D Tobin; C A Quan
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  The heterogeneity in femoral neck structure and strength.

Authors:  Mariana E Kersh; Marcus G Pandy; Quang M Bui; Anthony C Jones; Christoph H Arns; Mark A Knackstedt; Ego Seeman; Roger Md Zebaze
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Design and baseline characteristics of the osteoporotic fractures in men (MrOS) study--a large observational study of the determinants of fracture in older men.

Authors:  Eric Orwoll; Janet Babich Blank; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Jane Cauley; Steven Cummings; Kristine Ensrud; Cora Lewis; Peggy M Cawthon; Robert Marcus; Lynn M Marshall; Joan McGowan; Kathy Phipps; Sherry Sherman; Marcia L Stefanick; Katie Stone
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Gender inequalities in the treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Andrea Bor; Mária Matuz; Nóra Gyimesi; Zsuzsanna Biczók; Gyöngyvér Soós; Péter Doró
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Loss of bone density and lean body mass after hip fracture.

Authors:  K M Fox; J Magaziner; W G Hawkes; J Yu-Yahiro; J R Hebel; S I Zimmerman; L Holder; R Michael
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Femoral bone structural geometry adapts to mechanical loading and is influenced by sex steroids: the Penn State Young Women's Health Study.

Authors:  Moira A Petit; Thomas J Beck; Hung-Mo Lin; Christy Bentley; Richard S Legro; Tom Lloyd
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.398

9.  Predictors of bone loss after hip fracture.

Authors:  Lois E Wehren; William G Hawkes; J Richard Hebel; Denise Orwig; Sheryl I Zimmerman; Kathleen M Fox; Janet Yu-Yahiro; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-12-05       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Hip section modulus, a measure of bending resistance, is more strongly related to reported physical activity than BMD.

Authors:  S Kaptoge; N Dalzell; R W Jakes; N Wareham; N E Day; K T Khaw; T J Beck; N Loveridge; J Reeve
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-09-02       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  9 in total

1.  Soluble Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Receptor 1, Bone Resorption, and Bone Mineral Density in the Year Following Hip Fractures: The Baltimore Hip Studies.

Authors:  Shabnam Salimi; Michelle Shardell; Ram Miller; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Denise Orwig; Neal Fedarko; Marc C Hochberg; Jack M Guralnik; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Older men who sustain a hip fracture experience greater declines in bone mineral density at the contralateral hip than non-fractured comparators.

Authors:  A M Rathbun; J Magaziner; M D Shardell; L M Yerges-Armstrong; D Orwig; G E Hicks; M C Hochberg
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Differences in geometric strength at the contralateral hip between men with hip fracture and non-fractured comparators.

Authors:  Alan M Rathbun; Jay Magaziner; Michelle D Shardell; Thomas J Beck; Laura M Yerges-Armstrong; Denise Orwig; Gregory E Hicks; Alice S Ryan; Marc C Hochberg
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-12-05       Impact factor: 4.398

4.  Sex Differences in Recovery Across Multiple Domains Among Older Adults With Hip Fracture.

Authors:  Denise L Orwig; Danielle S Abraham; Marc C Hochberg; Ann Gruber-Baldini; Jack M Guralnik; Anne R Cappola; Justine Golden; Gregory E Hicks; Ram R Miller; Barbara Resnick; Michelle Shardell; Robert S Sterling; Rashmita Bajracharya; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 6.591

5.  Persistence of depressive symptoms and gait speed recovery in older adults after hip fracture.

Authors:  Alan M Rathbun; Michelle D Shardell; Elizabeth A Stuart; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Denise Orwig; Glenn V Ostir; Gregory E Hicks; Marc C Hochberg; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.485

6.  Long-term effect of testosterone replacement therapy on bone in hypogonadal men with Klinefelter Syndrome.

Authors:  N Tahani; L Nieddu; G Prossomariti; M Spaziani; S Granato; F Carlomagno; A Anzuini; A Lenzi; A F Radicioni; E Romagnoli
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 3.633

7.  Comparison of hip structure analysis and grip strength between femoral neck and basicervical fractures.

Authors:  Yong-Han Cha; Jun-Il Yoo
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-05-19       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Change in vertebral strength and bone mineral density in men and women over the year post-hip fracture: a subgroup analysis.

Authors:  Denise L Orwig; David Kopperdahl; Tony Keaveny; Jay Magaziner; Marc Hochberg
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 2.617

9.  Physical function and lean body mass as predictors of bone loss after hip fracture: a prospective follow-up study.

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

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.