Effects of age and sex on the strength and cortical thickness of the femoral neck

Bone

Volumn 48, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 741-747

  Carpenter, R D ^a   Sigurdsson, S ^b   Zhao, S ^a   Lu, Y ^c   Eiriksdottir, G ^b   Sigurdsson, G ^b,d,e   Jonsson, B Y ^f   Prevrhal, S ^g   Harris, T B ^h   Siggeirsdottir, K ^b   Guonason, V ^b,e   Lang, T F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b ICELANDIC HEART ASSOCIATION   (Iceland)

^c STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d LANDSPITALI UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Iceland)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ICELAND   (Iceland)

^f LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^g PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^h NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING   (United States)

Author keywords

Aging; Biomechanics; Bone geometry; Bone QCT; Osteoporosis

Indexed keywords

AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY HEIGHT; BODY WEIGHT; BONE CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; BONE DENSITY; BONE STRENGTH; BONE STRUCTURE; BONE THICKNESS; COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORTICAL BONE; FEMALE; FEMUR NECK; HIP FRACTURE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEX DIFFERENCE; STANDING; VOLUMETRY; WALKING;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FEMUR NECK; HUMANS; MALE; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 79952707153     PISSN: 87563282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2010.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Fox K.M., Cummings S.R., Williams E., Stone K. Femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures have different risk factors: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 2000, 11:1018-1023.
2. Meta M., Lu Y., Keyak J.H., Lang T. Young-elderly differences in bone density, geometry and strength indices depend on proximal femur sub-region: a cross sectional study in Caucasian-American women. Bone 2006, 39:152-158.
3. Sigurdsson G., Aspelund T., Chang M., Jonsdottir B., Sigurdsson S., Eiriksdottir G., et al. Increasing sex difference in bone strength in old age: the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik study (AGES-REYKJAVIK). Bone 2006, 39:644-651.
4. Beck T.J., Oreskovic T.L., Stone K.L., Ruff C.B., Ensrud K., Nevitt M.C., et al. Structural adaptation to changing skeletal load in the progression toward hip fragility: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 2001, 16:1108-1119.
5. Ruff C.B., Hayes W.C. Subperiosteal expansion and cortical remodeling of the human femur and tibia with aging. Science 1982, 217:945-948.
6. Havill L.M., Mahaney M.C., T.L.B., Specker B.L. Effects of genes, sex, age, and activity on BMC, bone size, and areal and volumetric BMD. J Bone Miner Res 2007, 22:737-746.
7. Yates L.B., Karasik D., Beck T.J., Cupples L.A., Kiel D.P. Hip structural geometry in old and old-old age: similarities and differences between men and women. Bone 2007, 41:722-732.
8. Poole K.E., Mayhew P.M., Rose C.M., Brown J.K., Bearcroft P.J., Loveridge N., et al. Changing structure of the femoral neck across the adult female lifespan. J Bone Miner Res 2010, 25:482-491.
9. Looker A.C., Beck T.J., Orwoll E.S. Does body size account for gender differences in femur bone density and geometry?. J Bone Miner Res 2001, 16:1291-1299.
10. Beck T.J., Ruff C.B., Shaffer R.A., Betsinger K., Trone D.W., Brodine S.K. Stress fracture in military recruits: gender differences in muscle and bone susceptibility factors. Bone 2000, 27:437-444.
11. Bell K.L., Loveridge N., Power J., Garrahan N., Stanton M., Lunt M., et al. Structure of the femoral neck in hip fracture: cortical bone loss in the inferoanterior to superoposterior axis. J Bone Miner Res 1999, 14:111-119.
12. Lang T.F., Keyak J.H., Heitz M.W., Augat P., Lu Y., Mathur A., et al. Volumetric quantitative computed tomography of the proximal femur: precision and relation to bone strength. Bone 1997, 21:101-108.
13. Carpenter R.D., Beaupre G.S., Lang T.F., Orwoll E.S., Carter D.R. New QCT analysis approach shows the importance of fall orientation on femoral neck strength. J Bone Miner Res 2005, 20:1533-1542.
14. Faulkner K.G., Gluer C.C., Grampp S., Genant H.K. Cross-calibration of liquid and solid QCT calibration standards: corrections to the UCSF normative data. Osteoporos Int 1993, 3:36-42.
15. Lotz J.C., Gerhart T.N., Hayes W.C. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone from the proximal femur: a quantitative CT study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990, 14:107-114.
16. Orr T.E., Beaupre G.S., Carter D.R., Schurman D.J. Computer predictions of bone remodeling around porous-coated implants. J Arthroplasty 1990, 5:191-200.
17. Morgan E.F., Keaveny T.M. Dependence of yield strain of human trabecular bone on anatomic site. J Biomech 2001, 34:569-577.
18. Prevrhal S., Engelke K., Kalender W.A. Accuracy limits for the determination of cortical width and density: the influence of object size and CT imaging parameters. Phys Med Biol 1999, 44:751-764.
19. Yang L., Maric I., McCloskey E.V., Eastell R. Shape, structural properties, and cortical stability along the femoral neck: a study using clinical QCT. J Clin Densitom 2008, 11:373-382.
20. Li W., Sode M., Saeed I., Lang T. Automated registration of hip and spine for longitudinal QCT studies: integration with 3D densitometric and structural analysis. Bone 2006, 38:273-279.
21. Gluer C.C., Blake G., Lu Y., Blunt B.A., Jergas M., Genant H.K. Accurate assessment of precision errors: how to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques. Osteoporos Int 1995, 5:262-270.
22. Bergmann G., Deuretzbacher G., Heller M., Graichen F., Rohlmann A., Strauss J., et al. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech 2001, 34:859-871.
23. Riggs B.L., Melton Iii L.J., Robb R.A., Camp J.J., Atkinson E.J., Peterson J.M., et al. Population-based study of age and sex differences in bone volumetric density, size, geometry, and structure at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res 2004, 19:1945-1954.
24. Cheng X.G., Lowet G., Boonen S., Nicholson P.H., Brys P., Nijs J., et al. Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry. Bone 1997, 20:213-218.
25. Robinovitch S.N., Hayes W.C., McMahon T.A. Prediction of femoral impact forces in falls on the hip. J Biomech Eng 1991, 113:366-374.
26. Moro M., van der Meulen M.C., Kiratli B.J., Marcus R., Bachrach L.K., Carter D.R. Body mass is the primary determinant of midfemoral bone acquisition during adolescent growth. Bone 1996, 19:519-526.
27. Forwood M.R., Bailey D.A., Beck T.J., Mirwald R.L., Baxter-Jones A.D., Uusi-Rasi K. Sexual dimorphism of the femoral neck during the adolescent growth spurt: a structural analysis. Bone 2004, 35:973-981.
28. Tommasini S.M., Nasser P., Jepsen K.J. Sexual dimorphism affects tibia size and shape but not tissue-level mechanical properties. Bone 2007, 40:498-505.
29. Nguyen A.D., Boling M.C., Levine B., Shultz S.J. Relationships between lower extremity alignment and the quadriceps angle. Clin J Sport Med 2009, 19:201-206.
30. Carter D.R. Mechanical loading histories and cortical bone remodeling. Calcif Tissue Int 1984, 36(Suppl 1):S19-S24.
31. Treece G.M., Gee A.H., Mayhew P.M., Poole K.E. High resolution cortical bone thickness measurement from clinical CT data. Med Image Anal 2010, 14:276-290.