4.7 Article

High Cortico-Trabecular Transitional Zone Porosity and Reduced Trabecular Density in Men and Women with Stress Fractures

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 10, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10051123

Keywords

bone microstructural deterioration; cortical porosity; high resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography; stress fracture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that stress fractures are associated with compromised cortical and trabecular microstructure in both distal radius and tibia, as compared to healthy controls. Men with stress fractures exhibited smaller cortical cross sectional area, higher porosity, and lower trabecular vBMD, while women showed higher porosity in certain zones and lower trabecular vBMD.
To determine whether stress fractures are associated with bone microstructural deterioration we quantified distal radial and the unfractured distal tibia using high resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography in 26 cases with lower limb stress fractures (15 males, 11 females; mean age 37.1 +/- 3.1 years) and 62 age-matched healthy controls (24 males, 38 females; mean age 35.0 +/- 1.6 years). Relative to controls, in men, at the distal radius, cases had smaller cortical cross sectional area (CSA) (p = 0.012), higher porosity of the outer transitional zone (OTZ) (p = 0.006), inner transitional zone (ITZ) (p = 0.043) and the compact-appearing cortex (CC) (p = 0.023) while trabecular vBMD was lower (p = 0.002). At the distal tibia, cases also had a smaller cortical CSA (p = 0.008). Cortical porosity was not higher, but trabecular vBMD was lower (p = 0.001). Relative to controls, in women, cases had higher distal radial porosity of the OTZ (p = 0.028), ITZ (p = 0.030) not CC (p = 0.054). Trabecular vBMD was lower (p = 0.041). Distal tibial porosity was higher in the OTZ (p = 0.035), ITZ (p = 0.009), not CC. Stress fractures are associated with compromised cortical and trabecular microstructure.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available