Literature DB >> 27999894

Tomography-Based Quantification of Regional Differences in Cortical Bone Surface Remodeling and Mechano-Response.

Annette I Birkhold1,2, Hajar Razi1,3, Georg N Duda1, Sara Checa1, Bettina M Willie4,5.   

Abstract

Bone has an adaptive capacity to maintain structural integrity. However, there seems to be a heterogeneous cortical (re)modeling response to loading at different regions within the same bone, which may lead to inconsistent findings since most studies analyze only one region. It remains unclear if the local mechanical environment is responsible for this heterogeneous response and whether both formation and resorption are affected. Thus, we compared the formation and resorptive response to in vivo loading and the strain environment at two commonly analyzed regions in the mouse tibia, the mid-diaphysis and proximal metaphysis. We quantified cortical surface (re)modeling by tracking changes between geometrically aligned consecutive in vivo micro-tomography images (time lapse 15 days). We investigated the local mechanical strain environment using finite element analyses. The relationship between mechanical stimuli and surface (re)modeling was examined by sub-dividing the mid-diaphysis and proximal metaphysis into 32 sub-regions. In response to loading, metaphyseal cortical bone (re)modeled predominantly at the periosteal surface, whereas diaphyseal (re)modeling was more pronounced at the endocortical surface. Furthermore, different set points and slopes of the relationship between engendered strains and remodeling response were found for the endosteal and periosteal surfaces at the metaphyseal and diaphyseal regions. Resorption was correlated with strain at the endocortical, but not the periosteal surfaces, whereas, formation correlated with strain at all surfaces, except at the metaphyseal periosteal surface. Therefore, besides mechanical stimuli, other non-mechanical factors are likely driving regional differences in adaptation. Studies investigating adaptation to loading or other treatments should consider region-specific (re)modeling differences.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptation; Bone; Formation; Mechanical loading; Remodeling; Resorption

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27999894     DOI: 10.1007/s00223-016-0217-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  11 in total

1.  Interspecies Comparison of Alveolar Bone Biology, Part I: Morphology and Physiology of Pristine Bone.

Authors:  I Pilawski; U S Tulu; P Ticha; P Schüpbach; H Traxler; Q Xu; J Pan; B R Coyac; X Yuan; Y Tian; Y Liu; J Chen; Y Erdogan; M Arioka; M Armaro; M Wu; J B Brunski; J A Helms
Journal:  JDR Clin Trans Res       Date:  2020-07-13

2.  Sost deficiency leads to reduced mechanical strains at the tibia midshaft in strain-matched in vivo loading experiments in mice.

Authors:  Laia Albiol; Myriam Cilla; David Pflanz; Ina Kramer; Michaela Kneissel; Georg N Duda; Bettina M Willie; Sara Checa
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Osteocytes regulate bone anabolic response to mechanical loading in male mice via activation of integrin α5.

Authors:  Dezhi Zhao; Rui Hua; Manuel A Riquelme; Hongyun Cheng; Teja Guda; Huiyun Xu; Sumin Gu; Jean X Jiang
Journal:  Bone Res       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 13.362

4.  Sost deficiency led to a greater cortical bone formation response to mechanical loading and altered gene expression.

Authors:  David Pflanz; Annette I Birkhold; Laia Albiol; Tobias Thiele; Catherine Julien; Anne Seliger; Erin Thomson; Ina Kramer; Michaela Kneissel; Georg N Duda; Uwe Kornak; Sara Checa; Bettina M Willie
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  PTH(1-34) treatment and/or mechanical loading have different osteogenic effects on the trabecular and cortical bone in the ovariectomized C57BL/6 mouse.

Authors:  Bryant C Roberts; Hector M Arredondo Carrera; Sahand Zanjani-Pour; Maya Boudiffa; Ning Wang; Alison Gartland; Enrico Dall'Ara
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 6.  Murine Axial Compression Tibial Loading Model to Study Bone Mechanobiology: Implementing the Model and Reporting Results.

Authors:  Russell P Main; Sandra J Shefelbine; Lee B Meakin; Matthew J Silva; Marjolein C H van der Meulen; Bettina M Willie
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 3.102

7.  Spatial relationship between bone formation and mechanical stimulus within cortical bone: Combining 3D fluorochrome mapping and poroelastic finite element modelling.

Authors:  A Carrieroa; A F Pereirab; A J Wilson; S Castagno; B Javaheri; A A Pitsillides; M Marenzana; S J Shefelbine
Journal:  Bone Rep       Date:  2018-02-16

8.  A novel algorithm to predict bone changes in the mouse tibia properties under physiological conditions.

Authors:  Vee San Cheong; Ana Campos Marin; Damien Lacroix; Enrico Dall'Ara
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2019-11-30

9.  Quantifying Asymmetry in Gait: The Weighted Universal Symmetry Index to Evaluate 3D Ground Reaction Forces.

Authors:  Sónia A Alves; Rainald M Ehrig; Peter C Raffalt; Alwina Bender; Georg N Duda; Alison N Agres
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-10-23

10.  The mechanoresponse of bone is closely related to the osteocyte lacunocanalicular network architecture.

Authors:  Alexander Franciscus van Tol; Victoria Schemenz; Wolfgang Wagermaier; Andreas Roschger; Hajar Razi; Isabela Vitienes; Peter Fratzl; Bettina M Willie; Richard Weinkamer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 12.779

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.