Determinants of bone damage: An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae

Mohammad J. Mirzaali, Flavia Libonati, Davide Ferrario, Luca Rinaudo, Carmelo Messina, Fabio M. Ulivieri, Bruno M. Cesana, Matteo Strano, Laura Vergani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0202210
JournalPLoS One
Volume13
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 1 2018

Fingerprint

in vivo studies
vertebrae
Bone
Spine
Swine
bones
Bone and Bones
swine
bone strength
bone density
Bone Density
Photon Absorptiometry
Tissue
Minerals
X-radiation
lumbar spine
bone fractures
Bone Fractures
methodology
X rays

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

Mirzaali, M. J., Libonati, F., Ferrario, D., Rinaudo, L., Messina, C., Ulivieri, F. M., ... Vergani, L. (2018). Determinants of bone damage: An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae. PLoS One, 13(8), [e0202210]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202210

Determinants of bone damage : An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae. / Mirzaali, Mohammad J.; Libonati, Flavia; Ferrario, Davide; Rinaudo, Luca; Messina, Carmelo; Ulivieri, Fabio M.; Cesana, Bruno M.; Strano, Matteo; Vergani, Laura.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 13, No. 8, e0202210, 01.08.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mirzaali, MJ, Libonati, F, Ferrario, D, Rinaudo, L, Messina, C, Ulivieri, FM, Cesana, BM, Strano, M & Vergani, L 2018, 'Determinants of bone damage: An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae', PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 8, e0202210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202210
Mirzaali MJ, Libonati F, Ferrario D, Rinaudo L, Messina C, Ulivieri FM et al. Determinants of bone damage: An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae. PLoS One. 2018 Aug 1;13(8). e0202210. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0202210
Mirzaali, Mohammad J. ; Libonati, Flavia ; Ferrario, Davide ; Rinaudo, Luca ; Messina, Carmelo ; Ulivieri, Fabio M. ; Cesana, Bruno M. ; Strano, Matteo ; Vergani, Laura. / Determinants of bone damage : An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae. In: PLoS One. 2018 ; Vol. 13, No. 8.
@article{9a819c49acf14362baab47f7226c29dc,
title = "Determinants of bone damage: An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Mirzaali, {Mohammad J.} and Flavia Libonati and Davide Ferrario and Luca Rinaudo and Carmelo Messina and Ulivieri, {Fabio M.} and Cesana, {Bruno M.} and Matteo Strano and Laura Vergani",
year = "2018",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0202210",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Determinants of bone damage

T2 - An ex-vivo study on porcine vertebrae

AU - Mirzaali, Mohammad J.

AU - Libonati, Flavia

AU - Ferrario, Davide

AU - Rinaudo, Luca

AU - Messina, Carmelo

AU - Ulivieri, Fabio M.

AU - Cesana, Bruno M.

AU - Strano, Matteo

AU - Vergani, Laura

PY - 2018/8/1

Y1 - 2018/8/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053543720&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053543720&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0202210

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0202210

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85053543720

VL - 13

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 8

M1 - e0202210

ER -