Bone geometry and skeletal fragility

被引:122
作者
Bouxsein M.L. [1 ]
Karasik D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Orthopedic Biomechanics Laboratory, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA 02215
关键词
Bone Mineral Density; Femoral Neck; Fracture Risk; Teriparatide; Bone Geometry;
D O I
10.1007/s11914-006-0002-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Although low bone mineral density is among the strongest risk factors for fracture, a number of clinical studies have demonstrated the limitations of bone mineral density measurements in assessing fracture risk and monitoring the response to therapy. These observations have brought renewed attention to the broader array of factors that influence skeletal fragility, including bone size, shape, and microarchitecture. This article reviews the relationship between bone geometry and skeletal fragility, focusing on the impact of bone geometry on bone strength and fracture risk. It also reviews recent data on the effect of osteoporosis therapies on femoral geometry. It is clear that characteristics of a bone's size and shape strongly influence its biomechanical strength, but there is no consensus as to the geometric parameters that improve prediction of fracture risk. Recent data from hip structure analysis indicate that antiresorptive and anticatabolic treatments alter femoral geometry, but this observation depends on several assumptions that have not been tested in subjects treated with osteoporosis therapies. Current knowledge is limited, in part, by the predominant use of two-dimensional techniques to assess bone geometry. Additional studies that incorporate three-dimensional imaging are needed to better define the relationship between bone geometry and skeletal fragility, and to establish the clinical utility of bone geometry measurements. Copyright © 2006 by Current Science Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:49 / 56
页数:7
相关论文
共 71 条
  • [1] Bone Health and Osteoporosis: A Report of the Surgeon General, (2004)
  • [2] Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy, JAMA, 285, pp. 785-795, (2001)
  • [3] Bouxsein M., Biomechanics of age-related fractures, Osteoporosis, Edn 2., pp. 509-534, (2001)
  • [4] Bouxsein M.L., Coan B.S., Lee S.C., Prediction of the strength of the elderly proximal femur by bone mineral density and quantitative ultrasound measurements of the heel and tibia, Bone, 25, pp. 49-54, (1999)
  • [5] Lochmuller E.M., Groll O., Kuhn V., Eckstein F., Mechanical strength of the proximal femur as predicted from geometric and densitometric bone properties at the lower limb versus the distal radius, Bone, 30, pp. 207-216, (2002)
  • [6] Lochmuller E.M., Burklein D., Kuhn V., Et al., Mechanical strength of the thoracolumbar spine in the elderly: Prediction from in situ dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, quantitative computed tomography (QCT), upper and lower limb peripheral QCT, and quantitative ultrasound, Bone, 31, pp. 77-84, (2002)
  • [7] Lochmuller E.M., Lill C.A., Kuhn V., Et al., Radius bone strength in bending, compression, and falling and its correlation with clinical densitometry at multiple sites, J Bone Miner Res, 17, pp. 1629-1638, (2002)
  • [8] Muller M.E., Webber C.E., Bouxsein M.L., Predicting the failure load of the distal radius, Osteoporos Int, 14, pp. 345-352, (2003)
  • [9] Cheng X., Lowet G., Boonen S., Et al., Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: Relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry, Bone, 20, pp. 213-218, (1997)
  • [10] Beck T.J., Ruff C.B., Warden K.E., Et al., Predicting femoral neck strength from bone mineral data. A structural approach, Invest Radiol, 25, pp. 6-18, (1990)