Giulia Di Pietro1,2, Manuel Scimeca3, Riccardo Iundusi1, Monica Celi1, Elena Gasbarra1, Umberto Tarantino1, Silvia Capuani4,5. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University of Rome Tor Vergata, "Policlinico Tor Vergata" Foundation, Viale Oxford, 81, Rome, 00133, Italy. 2. CNR ISC Roma Sapienza, Physics Department, "Sapienza", University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, Rome, 00185, Italy. 3. Anatomic Pathology Section, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome "Tor Vergata", Via Montpellier 1, Rome, 00133, Italy. 4. CNR ISC Roma Sapienza, Physics Department, "Sapienza", University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, Rome, 00185, Italy. silvia.capuani@roma1.infn.it. 5. Centro Fermi - Museo Storico Della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche Enrico Fermi, Piazza del Viminale 1, Rome, 00184, Italy. silvia.capuani@roma1.infn.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis and osteoporosis are strongly coupled with alterations of muscles quality and fats metabolism. However, there are no studies for investigating possible differences between osteoporotic and osteoarthritic muscles. Understanding muscle-bone and muscle-cartilage interactions would be of high clinical value. AIM: Investigate potential microstructural and physiological differences between osteoporotic and osteoarthritic muscles by diffusion Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) imaging (diffusion MRI) and histological findings. METHODS: Vastus-lateralis muscles excised from osteoporotic (n = 26, T Score < - 2.5, Kellgren-Lawrence ≤ 2) and osteoarthritic (n = 26, T Score > - 2.5, Kellgren--Lawrence 3 and 4) age-matched women were investigated by NMR relaxometry, diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI) at 9.4 T, and histological techniques. Intramyocellular (IMCL) and extramyocellular (EMCL) lipid were quantified. The percentage and mean diameters of fibers I and II were evaluated. Relationship between mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), the DTI eigenvalues (λ1, λ2, λ3), histological findings in muscles and clinical data (Kellgren-Lawrence and T score, age, menopausal age, body mass index) were studied. Pairwise comparisons between groups were made using one-way analysis of variance and correlation between variables was assessed with linear correlation analysis (Pearson's r coefficient). RESULTS: Osteoporotic muscles showed higher MD, λ1, λ2, λ3 compared to osteoarthritis ones. This is explainable with a significant higher density of IMCL droplets found inside the osteoarthritic muscles and a large amount of fibrotic tissue and IMCL infiltration between fibers, i.e. in endomysium and perimysium that lead to a more hindered diffusion. Furthermore, histological analysis suggests mitochondrial degeneration as the origin of the greatest amount of IMCL droplets in osteoarthritic muscles. CONCLUSION: This work highlights differences between muscles of osteoporotic and osteoarthritic subjects that can be quantified by NMR DTI investigations.
BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis and osteoporosis are strongly coupled with alterations of muscles quality and fats metabolism. However, there are no studies for investigating possible differences between osteoporotic and osteoarthritic muscles. Understanding muscle-bone and muscle-cartilage interactions would be of high clinical value. AIM: Investigate potential microstructural and physiological differences between osteoporotic and osteoarthritic muscles by diffusion Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) imaging (diffusion MRI) and histological findings. METHODS: Vastus-lateralis muscles excised from osteoporotic (n = 26, T Score < - 2.5, Kellgren-Lawrence ≤ 2) and osteoarthritic (n = 26, T Score > - 2.5, Kellgren--Lawrence 3 and 4) age-matched women were investigated by NMR relaxometry, diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI) at 9.4 T, and histological techniques. Intramyocellular (IMCL) and extramyocellular (EMCL) lipid were quantified. The percentage and mean diameters of fibers I and II were evaluated. Relationship between mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), the DTI eigenvalues (λ1, λ2, λ3), histological findings in muscles and clinical data (Kellgren-Lawrence and T score, age, menopausal age, body mass index) were studied. Pairwise comparisons between groups were made using one-way analysis of variance and correlation between variables was assessed with linear correlation analysis (Pearson's r coefficient). RESULTS: Osteoporotic muscles showed higher MD, λ1, λ2, λ3 compared to osteoarthritis ones. This is explainable with a significant higher density of IMCL droplets found inside the osteoarthritic muscles and a large amount of fibrotic tissue and IMCL infiltration between fibers, i.e. in endomysium and perimysium that lead to a more hindered diffusion. Furthermore, histological analysis suggests mitochondrial degeneration as the origin of the greatest amount of IMCL droplets in osteoarthritic muscles. CONCLUSION: This work highlights differences between muscles of osteoporotic and osteoarthritic subjects that can be quantified by NMR DTI investigations.
Authors: James F Griffith; David K W Yeung; Gregory E Antonio; Samuel Y S Wong; Timothy C Y Kwok; Jean Woo; Ping C Leung Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-10-19 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Michael J Davison; Monica R Maly; Jonathan D Adachi; Michael D Noseworthy; Karen A Beattie Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: G R Jordan; N Loveridge; K L Bell; J Power; G R Dickson; S Vedi; N Rushton; M T Clarke; J Reeve Journal: Bone Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: D Kumar; D C Karampinos; T D MacLeod; W Lin; L Nardo; X Li; T M Link; S Majumdar; R B Souza Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Gloria Bonaccorsi; Francesco Pio Cafarelli; Carlo Cervellati; François De Guio; Pantaleo Greco; Melchiore Giganti; Giuseppe Guglielmi Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: D T Felson; R C Lawrence; P A Dieppe; R Hirsch; C G Helmick; J M Jordan; R S Kington; N E Lane; M C Nevitt; Y Zhang; M Sowers; T McAlindon; T D Spector; A R Poole; S Z Yanovski; G Ateshian; L Sharma; J A Buckwalter; K D Brandt; J F Fries Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2000-10-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: C Terracciano; M Celi; D Lecce; J Baldi; E Rastelli; E Lena; R Massa; U Tarantino Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Kelsey H Collins; Walter Herzog; Graham Z MacDonald; Raylene A Reimer; Jaqueline L Rios; Ian C Smith; Ronald F Zernicke; David A Hart Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-02-23 Impact factor: 4.566