Y Fang1, L R Morse2, N Nguyen2, R A Battaglino2, R F Goldstein3, K L Troy4. 1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ, USA. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 3. Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA, USA. 4. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA, USA. ktroy@wpi.edu.
Abstract
We investigated the effect of 12 months of functional electrical stimulation-assisted rowing with and without zoledronic acid (ZA) on computationally estimated bone strength and stiffness in individuals with spinal cord injury. We found that rowing with ZA, but not rowing alone, improved stiffness at the distal femur, but not the proximal tibia. INTRODUCTION: People with spinal cord injury (SCI) have high fracture risk at the knee after the injury. Therapies that prevent bone loss or stimulate an anabolic response in bone have been proposed to reduce fractures. Zoledronic acid (ZA) is a potent bisphosphonate that inhibits osteoclastic resorption. Functional electrical stimulation (FES)-assisted rowing is a potentially osteogenic exercise involving mechanical stimulation to the lower extremities. Here, we investigated the effect of FES-assisted rowing with and without ZA on bone strength and stiffness in individuals with SCI. METHODS: Twenty individuals from a cohort of adults with SCI who participated in a clinical trial were included in the study. CT scans of their knees before and after the intervention were converted to finite element models. Bone failure strength (Tult) and stiffness were calculated at the proximal tibia and distal femur. RESULTS: Tult at the distal femur increased 4.6% among people who received rowing + ZA and decreased 13.9% among those with rowing only (p < 0.05 for group). Torsional and compressive stiffness at the femur metaphysis increased in people with rowing + ZA (+ 3 to +4%) and decreased in people with rowing only (- 7 to -8%; p < 0.05). Tult in the proximal tibia decreased in everyone, but the loss was attenuated in the rowing + ZA group. People with initially stronger bone tended to lose more strength. CONCLUSION: Overall, we observed increases in bone strength at the distal femur but not the proximal tibia, with FES-assisted rowing combined with ZA treatment. Rowing alone did not significantly prevent bone loss at either site, which might be attributed to insufficient mechanical loading.
We investigated the effect of 12 months of functional electrical stimulation-assisted rowing with and without zoledronic acid (ZA) on computationally estimated bone strength and stiffness in individuals with spinal cord injury. We found that rowing with ZA, but not rowing alone, improved stiffness at the distal femur, but not the proximal tibia. INTRODUCTION:People with spinal cord injury (SCI) have high fracture risk at the knee after the injury. Therapies that prevent bone loss or stimulate an anabolic response in bone have been proposed to reduce fractures. Zoledronic acid (ZA) is a potent bisphosphonate that inhibits osteoclastic resorption. Functional electrical stimulation (FES)-assisted rowing is a potentially osteogenic exercise involving mechanical stimulation to the lower extremities. Here, we investigated the effect of FES-assisted rowing with and without ZA on bone strength and stiffness in individuals with SCI. METHODS: Twenty individuals from a cohort of adults with SCI who participated in a clinical trial were included in the study. CT scans of their knees before and after the intervention were converted to finite element models. Bone failure strength (Tult) and stiffness were calculated at the proximal tibia and distal femur. RESULTS: Tult at the distal femur increased 4.6% among people who received rowing + ZA and decreased 13.9% among those with rowing only (p < 0.05 for group). Torsional and compressive stiffness at the femur metaphysis increased in people with rowing + ZA (+ 3 to +4%) and decreased in people with rowing only (- 7 to -8%; p < 0.05). Tult in the proximal tibia decreased in everyone, but the loss was attenuated in the rowing + ZA group. People with initially stronger bone tended to lose more strength. CONCLUSION: Overall, we observed increases in bone strength at the distal femur but not the proximal tibia, with FES-assisted rowing combined with ZA treatment. Rowing alone did not significantly prevent bone loss at either site, which might be attributed to insufficient mechanical loading.
Entities:
Keywords:
FE; Finite element modeling; QCT; Quantitative computed tomography
Authors: William A Bauman; Christopher M Cirnigliaro; Michael F La Fountaine; LeighAnn Martinez; Steven C Kirshblum; Ann M Spungen Journal: J Bone Miner Metab Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 2.626
Authors: J Shapiro; B Smith; T Beck; P Ballard; M Dapthary; K BrintzenhofeSzoc; J Caminis Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2007-04-07 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: C M Cirnigliaro; M J Myslinski; M F La Fountaine; S C Kirshblum; G F Forrest; W A Bauman Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: L R Morse; R A Battaglino; K L Stolzmann; L D Hallett; A Waddimba; D Gagnon; A A Lazzari; E Garshick Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2008-06-26 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Yvonne Zehnder; Simone Risi; Dieter Michel; Hans Knecht; Romain Perrelet; Marius Kraenzlin; Guido A Zäch; Kurt Lippuner Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2004-03-22 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Jesús F García-Gavilán; Indira Paz-Graniel; Nancy Babio; Dora Romaguera; Jose Alfredo Martínez; Vicente Martin; María Ángeles Martínez; Jadwiga Konieczna; Miguel Ruiz-Canela; José Antonio de Paz Fernandez; Albert Goday; Miguel Ángel Martínez-González; Mònica Bulló; Jordi Salas-Salvadó Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2021-11-29 Impact factor: 5.614