Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
TECHNOLOGIC S.r.l. Hologic Italia, Torino, Italy.
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 16;13(8):e0202210. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202210. eCollection 2018.
Bone's resistance to fracture depends on several factors, such as bone mass, microarchitecture, and tissue material properties. The clinical assessment of bone strength is generally performed by Dual-X Ray Photon Absorptiometry (DXA), measuring bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score (TBS). Although it is considered the major predictor of bone strength, BMD only accounts for about 70% of fragility fractures, while the remaining 30% could be described by bone "quality" impairment parameters, mainly related to tissue microarchitecture. The assessment of bone microarchitecture generally requires more invasive techniques, which are not applicable in routine clinical practice, or X-Ray based imaging techniques, requiring a longer post-processing. Another important aspect is the presence of local damage in the bony tissue that may also affect the prediction of bone strength and fracture risk. To provide a more comprehensive analysis of bone quality and quantity, and to assess the effect of damage, here we adopt a framework that includes clinical, morphological, and mechanical analyses, carried out by means of DXA, μCT and mechanical compressive testing, respectively. This study has been carried out on trabecular bones, taken from porcine trabecular vertebrae, for the similarity with human lumbar spine. This study confirms that no single method can provide a complete characterization of bone tissue, and the combination of complementary characterization techniques is required for an accurate and exhaustive description of bone status. BMD and TBS have shown to be complementary parameters to assess bone strength, the former assessing the bone quantity and resistance to damage, and the latter the bone quality and the presence of damage accumulation without being able to predict the risk of fracture.
骨骼的抗骨折能力取决于多个因素,如骨量、微观结构和组织材料特性。骨骼强度的临床评估通常通过双能 X 射线吸收法(DXA)进行,测量骨密度(BMD)和小梁骨评分(TBS)。尽管它被认为是骨骼强度的主要预测指标,但 BMD 仅能解释约 70%的脆性骨折,而其余 30%可能由骨骼“质量”受损参数来描述,这些参数主要与组织微观结构有关。骨骼微观结构的评估通常需要更具侵入性的技术,这些技术不适用于常规临床实践,或者需要更长的后处理时间的基于 X 射线的成像技术。另一个重要方面是骨组织中存在的局部损伤,这也可能影响骨骼强度和骨折风险的预测。为了更全面地分析骨骼的质量和数量,并评估损伤的影响,我们采用了一种包含临床、形态和机械分析的框架,分别通过 DXA、μCT 和机械压缩测试来进行。这项研究是在猪的小梁骨上进行的,因为其与人类腰椎具有相似性。这项研究证实,没有一种单一的方法可以提供对骨骼组织的完整描述,需要结合互补的描述技术,才能对骨骼状态进行准确和详尽的描述。BMD 和 TBS 已被证明是评估骨骼强度的互补参数,前者评估骨骼的数量和对损伤的抵抗力,后者评估骨骼的质量和损伤积累的存在,但无法预测骨折风险。