Assessment of femoral neck strength by 3-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry.

Hip fractures due to osteoporosis are accompanied with increased mortality and morbidity. Bone mineral density (BMD [g/cm(2)]) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the most important risk factor. However, an overlap exists between results of fractured and nonfractured populations. Macro-architectural parameters of the femur are independent risk factors of fracture. They have been evaluated in two dimensions using X-ray films or DXA scans; therefore, they are highly dependent on patient positioning and interindividual anatomical variations. To overcome this problem, we have previously shown the possibility to reconstruct human femurs using two perpendicular DXA scans and to calculate 3-dimensional (3D) geometric parameters from these reconstructions by a method called 3-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA). The aim of this article is to assess whether the combination of areal BMD and 3D geometric parameters calculated from 3D-XA improves failure load prediction of human proximal femurs in stance phase configuration. Twelve femurs (11 women, 1 man; aged 88+/-9 yr; range: 72-103 yr) were included in this study. The BMD was measured using a Hologic Delphi-W device (Hologic, Waltham, MA) and 3D reconstruction of the femurs was done using two perpendicular DXA scans as previously published. The calculated 3D geometric parameters included femoral neck axis length (FNAL), mid-femoral neck cross-sectional area (mid-FN CSA), neck shaft angle (NSA), and femoral head diameter (FHD). Mechanical testing was performed using stance phase configuration, which resulted in subcapital fractures. The FHD was correlated to mid-FN CSA and FNAL (r=0.68 and 0.76, respectively; p<0.001). Failure load was correlated to age, FHD, NSA, and BMD measurements. Multiple regression analysis showed that femoral neck BMD, FHD, and mid-FN CSA gave the best statistical model for failure load prediction (r(2)=0.84; p<0.002). This is the first study suggesting that combining areal BMD to 3D geometric parameters obtained by 3D-XA improve failure load prediction in human femurs.

[1]  T. Heinz,et al.  Predictive geometric factors in a standardized model of femoral neck fracture. Experimental study of cadaveric human femurs. , 2002, Injury.

[2]  S. I. Kim,et al.  Measurement of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part 1: 3D imaging method , 2000, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[3]  G Lowet,et al.  Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry. , 1997, Bone.

[4]  D. Cody,et al.  Femoral structure and stiffness in patients with femoral neck fracture , 2000, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[5]  W. Skalli,et al.  Three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA): a method for reconstruction of human bones using a dual X-ray absorptiometry device , 2005, Osteoporosis International.

[6]  S. Goldstein,et al.  Femoral strength is better predicted by finite element models than QCT and DXA. , 1999, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  L. S. Matthews,et al.  Proximal femoral bone density and its correlation to fracture load and hip-screw penetration load. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[8]  S. B. Park,et al.  Measurement of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part 2:3D modelling method , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[9]  C C Glüer,et al.  Prediction of hip fractures from pelvic radiographs: The study of osteoporotic fractures , 1994, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[10]  Sun I. Kim,et al.  Femoral Anteversion: Estimation by 3D Modelling , 1998, MedInfo.

[11]  R. Putz,et al.  Correlation of Femoral and Lumbar DXA and Calcaneal Ultrasound, Measured In Situ with Intact Soft Tissues, with the In Vitro Failure Loads of the Proximal Femur , 1998, Osteoporosis International.

[12]  H K Genant,et al.  Volumetric quantitative computed tomography of the proximal femur: precision and relation to bone strength. , 1997, Bone.

[13]  S. Cummings,et al.  Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures , 2002, The Lancet.

[14]  G Lowet,et al.  Effects of anteversion on femoral bone mineral density and geometry measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: a cadaver study. , 1997, Bone.

[15]  W. G. Boettcher,et al.  Total hip arthroplasties in the elderly. Morbidity, mortality, and cost effectiveness. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  C C Glüer,et al.  Simple measurement of femoral geometry predicts hip fracture: The study of osteoporotic fractures , 1993, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[17]  L. S. Matthews,et al.  Stable fixation of intertrochanteric fractures. , 1974, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  Maurice E. Muller,et al.  The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones , 1990 .

[19]  J. Michelotti,et al.  Femoral Neck Length and Hip Fracture Risk , 1999, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[20]  D Mitton,et al.  A Biplanar Reconstruction Method Based on 2D and 3D Contours: Application to the Distal Femur , 2003, Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering.

[21]  L. Melton,et al.  Hip fractures: a worldwide problem today and tomorrow. , 1993, Bone.

[22]  Robert W. Bucholz,et al.  The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones. , 1991 .

[23]  G U Rao,et al.  Predicting femoral neck strength from bone mineral data. A structural approach. , 1990, Investigative radiology.

[24]  J. D. De Guise,et al.  3D reconstruction of the proximal femur with low-dose digital stereoradiography , 2004, Computer aided surgery : official journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery.