Bone density and strength from thoracic and lumbar CT scans both predict incident vertebral fractures independently of fracture location.

In a population-based study, we found that computed tomography (CT)-based bone density and strength measures from the thoracic spine predicted new vertebral fracture as well as measures from the lumbar spine, suggesting that CT scans at either the thorax or abdominal regions are useful to assess vertebral fracture risk. INTRODUCTION: Prior studies have shown that computed tomography (CT)-based lumbar bone density and strength measurements predict incident vertebral fracture. This study investigated whether CT-based bone density and strength measurements from the thoracic spine predict incident vertebral fracture and compared the performance of thoracic and lumbar bone measurements to predict incident vertebral fracture. METHODS: This case-control study of community-based men and women (age 74.6 ± 6.6) included 135 cases with incident vertebral fracture at any level and 266 age- and sex-matched controls. We used baseline CT scans to measure integral and trabecular volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and vertebral strength (via finite element analysis, FEA) at the T8 and L2 levels. Association between these measurements and vertebral fracture was determined by using conditional logistic regression. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting incident vertebral fracture were determined for lumbar spine and thoracic bone measurements. RESULTS: Bone measurements from T8 and L2 predicted incident vertebral fracture equally well, regardless of fracture location. Specifically, for predicting vertebral fracture at any level, the odds ratio (per 1-SD decrease) for the vBMD and strength measurements at L2 and T8 ranged from 2.0 to 2.7 (p < 0.0001) and 1.8 to 2.8 (p < 0.0001), respectively. Results were similar when predicting fracture only in the thoracic versus the thoracolumbar spine. Lumbar and thoracic spine bone measurements had similar sensitivity and specificity for predicting incident vertebral fracture. CONCLUSION: These findings indicated that like those from the lumbar spine, CT-based bone density and strength measurements from the thoracic spine may be useful for identifying individuals at high risk for vertebral fracture.

Prediction of incident vertebral fracture using CT-based finite element analysis.

Prior studies show vertebral strength from computed tomography-based finite element analysis may be associated with vertebral fracture risk. We found vertebral strength had a strong association with new vertebral fractures, suggesting that vertebral strength measures identify those at risk for vertebral fracture and may be a useful clinical tool. INTRODUCTION: We aimed to determine the association between vertebral strength by quantitative computed tomography (CT)-based finite element analysis (FEA) and incident vertebral fracture (VF). In addition, we examined sensitivity and specificity of previously proposed diagnostic thresholds for fragile bone strength and low BMD in predicting VF. METHODS: In a case-control study, 26 incident VF cases (13 men, 13 women) and 62 age- and sex-matched controls aged 50 to 85 years were selected from the Framingham multi-detector computed tomography cohort. Vertebral compressive strength, integral vBMD, trabecular vBMD, CT-based BMC, and CT-based aBMD were measured from CT scans of the lumbar spine. RESULTS: Lower vertebral strength at baseline was associated with an increased risk of new or worsening VF after adjusting for age, BMI, and prevalent VF status (odds ratio (OR) = 5.2 per 1 SD decrease, 95% CI 1.3-19.8). Area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve comparisons revealed that vertebral strength better predicted incident VF than CT-based aBMD (AUC = 0.804 vs. 0.715, p = 0.05) but was not better than integral vBMD (AUC = 0.815) or CT-based BMC (AUC = 0.794). Additionally, proposed fragile bone strength thresholds trended toward better sensitivity for identifying VF than that of aBMD-classified osteoporosis (0.46 vs. 0.23, p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: This study shows an association between vertebral strength measures and incident vertebral fracture in men and women. Though limited by a small sample size, our findings also suggest that bone strength estimates by CT-based FEA provide equivalent or better ability to predict incident vertebral fracture compared to CT-based aBMD. Our study confirms that CT-based estimates of vertebral strength from FEA are useful for identifying patients who are at high risk for vertebral fracture.

The associations between QCT-based vertebral bone measurements and prevalent vertebral fractures depend on the spinal locations of both bone measurement and fracture.

UNLABELLED: We examined how spinal location affects the relationships between quantitative computed tomography (QCT)-based bone measurements and prevalent vertebral fractures. Upper spine (T4-T10) fractures appear to be more strongly related to bone measures than lower spine (T11-L4) fractures, while lower spine measurements are at least as strongly related to fractures as upper spine measurements. INTRODUCTION: Vertebral fracture (VF), a common injury in older adults, is most prevalent in the mid-thoracic (T7-T8) and thoracolumbar (T12-L1) areas of the spine. However, measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) are typically made in the lumbar spine. It is not clear how the associations between bone measurements and VFs are affected by the spinal locations of both bone measurements and VF. METHODS: A community-based case-control study includes 40 cases with moderate or severe prevalent VF and 80 age- and sex-matched controls. Measures of vertebral BMD, strength (estimated by finite element analysis), and factor of risk (load:strength ratio) were determined based on QCT scans at the L3 and T10 vertebrae. Associations were determined between bone measures and prevalent VF occurring at any location, in the upper spine (T4-T10), or in the lower spine (T11-L4). RESULTS: Prevalent VF at any location was significantly associated with bone measures, with odds ratios (ORs) generally higher for measurements made at L3 (ORs = 1.9-3.9) than at T10 (ORs = 1.5-2.4). Upper spine fracture was associated with these measures at both T10 and L3 (ORs = 1.9-8.2), while lower spine fracture was less strongly associated (ORs = 1.0-2.4) and only reached significance for volumetric BMD measures at L3. CONCLUSIONS: Closer proximity between the locations of bone measures and prevalent VF does not strengthen associations between bone measures and fracture. Furthermore, VF etiology may vary by region, with VFs in the upper spine more strongly related to skeletal fragility.

A comparison of DXA and CT based methods for estimating the strength of the femoral neck in post-menopausal women.

UNLABELLED: The study goal was to compare simple two-dimensional (2D) analyses of bone strength using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) data to more sophisticated three-dimensional (3D) finite element analyses using quantitative computed tomography (QCT) data. DXA- and QCT-derived femoral neck geometry, simple strength indices, and strength estimates were well correlated. INTRODUCTION: Simple 2D analyses of bone strength can be done with DXA data and applied to large data sets. We compared 2D analyses to 3D finite element analyses (FEA) based on QCT data. METHODS: Two hundred thirteen women participating in the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) received hip DXA and QCT scans. DXA BMD and femoral neck diameter and axis length were used to estimate geometry for composite bending (BSI) and compressive strength (CSI) indices. These and comparable indices computed by Hip Structure Analysis (HSA) on the same DXA data were compared to indices using QCT geometry. Simple 2D engineering simulations of a fall impacting on the greater trochanter were generated using HSA and QCT femoral neck geometry; these estimates were benchmarked to a 3D FEA of fall impact. RESULTS: DXA-derived CSI and BSI computed from BMD and by HSA correlated well with each other (R=0.92 and 0.70) and with QCT-derived indices (R=0.83-0.85 and 0.65-0.72). The 2D strength estimate using HSA geometry correlated well with that from QCT (R=0.76) and with the 3D FEA estimate (R=0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Femoral neck geometry computed by HSA from DXA data corresponds well enough to that from QCT for an analysis of load stress in the larger SWAN data set. Geometry derived from BMD data performed nearly as well. Proximal femur breaking strength estimated from 2D DXA data is not as well correlated with that derived by a 3D FEA using QCT data.

Relationship of femoral neck areal bone mineral density to volumetric bone mineral density, bone size, and femoral strength in men and women.

UNLABELLED: Using combined dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and quantitative computed tomography, we demonstrate that men matched with women for femoral neck (FN) areal bone mineral density (aBMD) have lower volumetric BMD (vBMD), higher bone cross-sectional area, and relatively similar values for finite element (FE)-derived bone strength. INTRODUCTION: aBMD by DXA is widely used to identify patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures. aBMD is influenced by bone size (i.e., matched for vBMD, larger bones have higher aBMD), and increasing evidence indicates that absolute aBMD predicts a similar risk of fracture in men and women. Thus, we sought to define the relationships between FN aBMD (assessed by DXA) and vBMD, bone size, and FE-derived femoral strength obtained from quantitative computed tomography scans in men versus women. METHODS: We studied men and women aged 40 to 90 years and not on osteoporosis medications. RESULTS: In 114 men and 114 women matched for FN aBMD, FN total cross-sectional area was 38% higher (P < 0.0001) and vBMD was 16% lower (P < 0.0001) in the men. FE models constructed in a subset of 28 women and 28 men matched for FN aBMD showed relatively similar values for bone strength and the load-to-strength ratio in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of young and old men and women from Rochester, MN, USA who are matched by FN aBMD, because of the offsetting effects of bone size and vBMD, femoral strength and the load-to-strength ratio tended to be relatively similar across the sexes.

Biomechanical consequences of an isolated overload on the human vertebral body.

The biomechanical consequences of an isolated overload to the vertebral body may play a role in the etiology of vertebral fracture. In this context, we quantified residual strains and reductions in stiffness and ultimate load when vertebral bodies were loaded to various levels beyond the elastic regimen and related these properties to the externally applied strain and bone density. Twenty-three vertebral bodies (T11-L4, from 23 cadavers aged 20-90 years) were loaded once in compression to a randomized nominal strain level between 0.37 and 4.5%, unloaded, and then reloaded to 10% strain. Residual strains of up to 1.36% developed on unloading and depended on the applied strain (r2=0.85) but not on density (p = 0.25). Percentage reductions in stiffness and ultimate load of up to 83.7 and 52.5%, respectively, depended on both applied strain (r2 = 0.90 and r2 = 0.32, respectively) and density (r2 = 0.23 and r2 = 0.22, respectively). Development of residual strains is indicative of permanent deformations, whereas percentage reductions in stiffness are direct measures of effective mechanical damage. These results therefore demonstrate that substantial mechanical damage-which is not visible from radiographs-can develop in the vertebral body after isolated overloads, as well as subtle but significant permanent deformations. This behavior is similar to that observed previously for cylindrical cores of trabecular bone. Taken together, these findings indicate that the damage behavior of the lumbar and lower thoracic vertebral body is dominated by the trabecular bone and may be an important factor in the etiology of vertebral fracture.

Mechanical behavior of human trabecular bone after overloading.

With the etiology of osteoporotic fractures as motivation, the goal of this study was to characterize the mechanical behavior of human trabecular bone after overloading. Specifically, we quantified the reductions in modulus and strength and the development of residual deformations and determined the dependence of these parameters on the applied strain and apparent density. Forty cylindrical specimens of human L1 vertebral trabecular bone were destructively loaded in compression at 0.5% strain per second to strains of up to 3.0% and then immediately unloaded to zero stress and reloaded. (An ancillary experiment on more readily available bovine bone had been performed previously to develop this testing protocol.) In general, the reloading stress-strain curve had a short initial nonlinear region with a tangent modulus similar to Young's modulus. This was followed by an approximately linear region spanning to 0.7% strain, with a reduced residual modulus. The reloading curve always approached the extrapolated envelope of the original loading curve. Percent modulus reduction (between Young's and residual), a quantitative measure of mechanical damage, ranged from 5.2 to 91.0% across the specimens. It increased with increasing plastic strain (r2 = 0.97) but was not related to modulus or apparent density. Percent strength reduction, in the range of 3.6-63.8%, increased with increasing plastic strain (r2 = 0.61) and decreasing apparent density (r2 = 0.23). The residual strains of up to 1.05% depended strongly on applied strain (r2 = 0.96). Statistical comparisons with previous data for bovine tibial bone lend substantial generality to these trends and provide an envelope of expected behavior for other sites. In addition to providing a basis for biomechanical analysis of the effects of damage in trabecular bone at the organ level, these findings support the concept that occasional overloads may increase the risk of fracture by substantially degrading the mechanical properties of the underlying trabecular bone.

Localized damage in vertebral bone is most detrimental in regions of high strain energy density.

It was hypothesized that damage to bone tissue would be most detrimental to the structural integrity of the vertebral body if it occurred in regions with high strain energy density, and not necessarily in regions of high or low trabecular bone apparent density, or in a particular anatomic location. The reduction in stiffness due to localized damage was computed in 16 finite element models of 10-mm-thick human vertebral sections. Statistical analyses were performed to determine which characteristic at the damage location--strain energy density, apparent density, or anatomic location--best predicted the corresponding stiffness reduction. There was a strong positive correlation between regional strain energy density and structural stiffness reduction in all 16 vertebral sections for damage in the trabecular centrum (p < 0.05, r2 = 0.43-0.93). By contrast, regional apparent density showed a significant negative correlation to stiffness reduction in only four of the sixteen bones (p < 0.05, r2 = 0.47-0.58). While damage in different anatomic locations did lead to different reductions in stiffness (p < 0.0001, ANOVA), no single location was consistently the most critical location for damage. Thus, knowledge of the characteristics of bone that determine strain energy density distributions can provide an understanding of how damage reduces whole bone mechanical properties. A patient-specific finite element model displaying a map of strain energy density can help optimize surgical planning and reinforcement of bone in individuals with high fracture risk.

Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone.

If bone adapts to maintain constant strains and if on-axis yield strains in trabecular bone are independent of apparent density, adaptive remodeling in trabecular bone should maintain a constant safety factor (yield strain/functional strain) during habitual loading. To test the hypothesis that yield strains are indeed independent of density, compressive (n = 22) and tensile (n = 22) yield strains were measured without end-artifacts for low density (0.18 +/- 0.04 g cm(-3)) human vertebral trabecular bone specimens. Loads were applied in the superior-inferior direction along the principal trabecular orientation. These 'on-axis' yield strains were compared to those measured previously for high-density (0.51 +/- 0.06 g cm(-3)) bovine tibial trabecular bone (n = 44). Mean (+/- S.D.) yield strains for the human bone were 0.78 +/- 0.04% in tension and 0.84 +/- 0.06% in compression; corresponding values for the bovine bone were 0.78 +/- 0.04 and 1.09 +/- 0.12%, respectively. Tensile yield strains were independent of the apparent density across the entire density range (human p = 0.40, bovine p = 0.64, pooled p = 0.97). By contrast, compressive yield strains were linearly correlated with apparent density for the human bone (p < 0.001) and the pooled data (p < 0.001), and a suggestive trend existed for the bovine data (p = 0.06). These results refute the hypothesis that on-axis yield strains for trabecular bone are independent of density for compressive loading, although values may appear constant over a narrow density range. On-axis tensile yield strains appear to be independent of both apparent density and anatomic site.

Systematic and random errors in compression testing of trabecular bone.

We sought to quantify the systematic and random errors associated with end-artifacts in the platens compression test for trabecular bone. Our hypothesis was that while errors may depend on anatomic site, they do not depend on apparent density and therefore have substantial random components. Trabecular bone specimens were first tested nondestructively using newly developed accurate protocols and then were tested again using the platens compression test. Percentage differences in modulus between the techniques (bovine proximal tibia [n = 18] and humerus [n = 17] and human lumbar spine, [n = 9]) were in the range of 4-86%. These differences did not depend on anatomic site (p = 0.21) and were only weakly dependent on apparent density and specimen aspect ratio (r2 < 0.10). The mean percentage difference in modulus was 32.6%, representing the systematic component of the end-artifact error. Neglecting the minor variations explained by density and specimen size (approximately 10%), an upper bound on the random error from end-artifacts in this experiment was taken as the SD of the modulus difference (+/-18.2%). Based on a synthesis of data taken from this study and from the literature, we concluded that the systematic underestimation error in the platens compression test can be only approximated and is in the range of 20-40%; the substantial random error (+/-12.5%) confounds correction, particularly when the sample size is small. These errors should be considered when interpreting results from the platens test, and more accurate testing techniques should be used when such errors are not acceptable.