Advertisement

Osteoporosis International

, Volume 28, Issue 9, pp 2723–2727 | Cite as

Bone density, microarchitecture, and material strength in chronic kidney disease patients at the time of kidney transplantation

  • M. J. Pérez-Sáez
  • S. Herrera
  • D. Prieto-Alhambra
  • L. Vilaplana
  • X. Nogués
  • M. Vera
  • D. Redondo-Pachón
  • M. Mir
  • R. Güerri
  • M. Crespo
  • A. Díez-Pérez
  • J. Pascual
Short Communication

Abstract

Summary

Bone health is assessed by bone mineral density (BMD). Other techniques such as trabecular bone score and microindentation could improve the risk of fracture’s estimation. Our chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients presented worse bone health (density, microarchitecture, mechanical properties) than controls. More than BMD should be done to evaluate patients at risk of fracture.

Introduction

BMD measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is used to assess bone health in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Recently, trabecular bone score (TBS) and microindentation that can measure microarchitectural and mechanical properties of bone have demonstrated better correlation with fractures than DXA in different populations. We aimed to characterize bone health (BMD, TBS, and strength) and calcium/phosphate metabolism in a cohort of 53 ESRD patients undergoing kidney transplantation (KT) and 94 controls with normal renal function.

Methods

Laboratory workout, lumbar spine/hip BMD measurements (using DXA), lumbar spine TBS, and bone strength were carried out. The latter was assessed with an impact microindentation device, standardized as percentage of a reference value, and expressed as bone material strength index (BMSi) units. Multivariable linear regression was used to study differences between cases and controls adjusted by age, gender, and body mass index.

Results

Among cases, serum calcium was 9.6 ± 0.7 mg/dl, phosphorus 4.4 ± 1.2 mg/dl, and intact parathyroid hormone 214 pg/ml [102–390]. Fourteen patients (26.4%) had prevalent asymptomatic fractures in spinal X-ray. BMD was significantly lower among ESRD patients compared to controls: lumbar 0.966 ± 0.15 vs 0.982 ± 0.15 (adjusted p = 0.037), total hip 0.852 ± 0.15 vs 0.902 ± 0.13 (adjusted p < 0.001), and femoral neck 0.733 ± 0.15 vs 0.775 ± 0.12 (adjusted p < 0.001), as were TBS (1.20 [1.11–1.30] vs 1.31 [1.19–1.43] (adjusted p < 0.001)) and BMSi (79 [71.8–84.2] vs 82. [77.5–88.9] (adjusted p = 0.005)).

Conclusions

ESRD patients undergoing transplant surgery have damaged bone health parameters (density, microarchitecture, and mechanical properties) despite acceptably controlled hyperparathyroidism. Detecting these abnormalities may assist in identifying patients at high risk of post-transplantation fractures.

Keywords

Bone mineral disease Bone material strength index Chronic kidney disease Microindentation Trabecular bone score 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was performed in part by a research grant from the Spanish Society of Nephrology. MJPS has support from a Rio Hortega contract 2016-17, ISCIII. MJPS and SH did this work as part of their doctoral thesis at the Universitat Autònoma Barcelona. MC and JP are supported by grants PI13/0598, PI16/00617 Intensification Programs (Spanish Ministry of Health ISCIII) 2015-16, and RedinRen RD16/0009/0013. Microindentation techniques are supported in part by RETICEF, Instituto Carlos III (FEDER Funds).

Compliance with ethical standards

Written informed consent was obtained, and the Ethics Review Board in our institution approved the study protocol

Conflict of interest

Maria José Pérez-Sáez, Sabina Herrera, Laia Vilaplana, Xavier Nogués, Dolores Redondo-Pachón, Marisa Mir, Roberto Güerri, Marta Crespo, and Julio Pascual declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Daniel Prieto-Alhambra’s institutions have received research funding in the form of unrestricted research grants from AMGEN, BIOIBERICA, and Servier Laboratoires.

Adolfo Díez-Pérez is a shareholder of Active Life Scientific.

Supplementary material

198_2017_4065_MOESM1_ESM.docx (12 kb)
Table S1 (DOCX 11 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM2_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S2 (DOCX 12 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM3_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S3 (DOCX 12 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM4_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S4 (DOCX 13 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM5_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S5 (DOCX 13 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM6_ESM.docx (13 kb)
Table S6 (DOCX 13 kb)
198_2017_4065_MOESM7_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Table S7 (DOCX 13 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Copley JB, Wüthrich RP (2011) Therapeutic management of post-kidney transplant hyperparathyroidism. Clin Transplantation 25(1):24–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mikuls TR, Julian BA, Bartolucci A, Saag KG (2003) Bone mineral density changes within six months of renal transplantation. Transplantation 75(1):49–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Naylor KL, Li AH, Lam NN, Hodsman AB, Jamal SA, Garg AX (2013) Fracture risk in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review. Transplantation 95(12):1461–1470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Malluche HH, Davenport DL, Cantor T, Moniere-Faugere MC (2014) Bone mineral density and serum biochemical predictors of bone loss in patients with CKD on dialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 9:1254–1262CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ott SM (2016) Bone strength: more than just bone density. Kidney Int 89(1):16–19CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCloskey EV, Odén A, Harvey NC et al (2016) A meta-analysis of trabecular bone score in fracture risk prediction and its relationship to FRAX. J Bone Miner Res 31(5):940–948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Silva BC, Leslie WD, Resch H et al (2014) Trabecular bone score: a non invasive analytical method based upon the DXA image. J Bone Miner Res 29:518–530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burnerová L, Ronová P, Veresová J et al (2016) Osteoporosis and impaired trabecular bone score in hemodialysis patients. Kidney Blood Press Res 41:345–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Díez-Pérez A, Güerri R, Nogués X et al (2010) Microindentation for in vivo measurement of bone tissue mechanical properties in humans. J Bone Mineral Res 25(8):1877–1885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Güerri-Fernández RC, Nogués X, Quesada Gómez JM et al (2013) Microindentation for in vivo measurement of bone tissue properties in atypical femoral fracture patients and controls. J Bone Mineral Res 28(1):162–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hansma P, Yu H, Schultz D et al (2009) The tissue diagnostic instrument. Rev Sci Instrum 80(5):054303CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farr JN, Drake MT, Amin S et al (2014) In vivo assessment of bone quality in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes. J Bone Mineral Res 29(4):787–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Malgo F, Hamdy NA, Papapoulos SE et al (2015) Bone material strength as measured by microindentation in vivo is decreased in patients with fragility fractures independently of bone mineral density. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 100(5):2039–2045CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pérez-Sáez MJ, Herrera S, Prieto-Alhambra D, et al. (2016) Bone density, microarchitecture and tissue quality long-term after transplant. Transplantation [epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Genant HK, Wu CY, van Kujik C, Nevitt M (1993) Vertebral fracture assessment using a semi-quantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137–1148CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Díez Pérez A, Bouxsein ML, Eriksen EF et al (2016) Recommendations for a standard procedure to assess cortical bone at the tissue-level in vivo using impact microindentation. Bone Reports 5:181–185CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKDMBD Work Group (2009) KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis, evaluation, prevention, and treatment of chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). Kidney Int Suppl 113:S1–S130Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bucur RC, Panjwani DD, Turner L, Rader T, West SL, Jamal SA (2015) Low bone mineral density and fractures in stages 3-5 CKD: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 26:449–458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alem AM, Sherrard DJ, Gillen DL et al (2000) Increased risk of hip fracture among patients with end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int 58:396–399CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ott SM (2009) Review article: bone density in patients with chronic kidney diseases stages 4-5. Nephrology (Carlton) 14(4):395–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mellibovsky L, Prieto-Alhambra D, Mellibovsky F et al (2015 Sep) Bone tissue properties measurement by reference point indentation in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 30(9):1651–1656CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. J. Pérez-Sáez
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • S. Herrera
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  • D. Prieto-Alhambra
    • 2
    • 5
    • 6
  • L. Vilaplana
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  • X. Nogués
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  • M. Vera
    • 1
    • 2
  • D. Redondo-Pachón
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • M. Mir
    • 1
    • 2
  • R. Güerri
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  • M. Crespo
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • A. Díez-Pérez
    • 2
    • 4
    • 5
  • J. Pascual
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Nephrology, Hospital del MarAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Institut Mar d’Investigacions MediquesBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.REDINREN, Instituto Carlos IIIMadridSpain
  4. 4.Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital del MarAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  5. 5.RETICEF, Instituto Carlos IIIMadridSpain
  6. 6.Oxford NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations