European Spine Journal

, Volume 26, Issue 9, pp 2281–2289 | Cite as

Cervical spine bone density in young healthy adults as a function of sex, vertebral level and anatomic location

  • William J. Anderst
  • Tyler West
  • William F. DonaldsonIII
  • Joon Y. Lee
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Purpose

Bone mineral density (BMD) measured using quantitative computed tomography (QCT) has been shown to correlate with bone mechanical properties. Knowledge of BMD within specific anatomic regions of the spine is valuable to surgeons who must secure instrumentation to the vertebrae, to medical device developers who design screws and disc replacements, and to researchers who assign mechanical properties to computational models. The objective of this study was to comprehensively characterize BMD in the cervical spine of young healthy adults.

Methods

QCT was used to determine BMD in the cervical spines of 31 healthy adults (age 20–35). Subject-specific 3D models of each vertebra were created from CT scans, and anatomic regions of interest were identified in each bone (C1: 3 regions; C2: 9 regions, C3–C7: 13 regions). Statistical tests were performed to identify differences in BMD according to vertebral level, anatomic regions within vertebrae, and sex.

Results

BMD varied significantly among vertebral levels and among anatomic regions within each vertebra. Females had higher BMD than males (p = .041) primarily due to higher BMD in the posterior regions of each vertebra.

Conclusions

These data can serve as a baseline to identify BMD changes in older and symptomatic patients. This data set is also the first report of volumetric bone density within different anatomic regions of the atlas and axis of the cervical spine. The finding of higher BMD in females is in agreement with the previous QCT results but contradicts DEXA results that are known to be dependent upon bone size.

Keywords

Cervical spine Bone mineral density BMD QCT DEXA 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Research support for this project was provided by Synthes Spine and the Albert B. Ferguson, Jr., MD Orthopaedic Fund of The Pittsburgh Foundation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have personal or financial interests with people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) this work.

Funding

Synthes Spine and The Albert B. Ferguson Fund of the Pittsburgh Foundation

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Liu F, Cheng J, Komistek RD, Mahfouz MR, Sharma A (2007) In vivo evaluation of dynamic characteristics of the normal, fused, and disc replacement cervical spines. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(23):2578–2584. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318158cdf8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pospiech J, Stolke D, Wilke HJ, Claes LE (1999) Intradiscal pressure recordings in the cervical spine. Neurosurgery 44(2):379–384 (discussion 384–375) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goel VK, Clausen JD (1998) Prediction of load sharing among spinal components of a C5–C6 motion segment using the finite element approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23(6):684–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wolff J (1986) The law of bone remodeling (trans: Maquet P, Furlong R). Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Curylo LJ, Lindsey RW, Doherty BJ, LeBlanc A (1996) Segmental variations of bone mineral density in the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21(3):319–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoganandan N, Pintar F, Wilson CR, Sances A Jr (1990) In vitro biomechanical study of female geriatric cervical vertebral bodies. J Biomed Eng 12(2):97–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Stemper BD, Baisden JL, Aktay R, Shender BS, Paskoff G, Laud P (2006) Trabecular bone density of male human cervical and lumbar vertebrae. Bone 39(2):336–344. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2006.01.160 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Anderst WJ, Thorhauer ED, Lee JY, Donaldson WF, Kang JD (2011) Cervical spine bone mineral density as a function of vertebral level and anatomic location. Spine J Off J N Am Spine Soc 11(7):659–667. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.05.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhuang XM, Yu BS, Zheng ZM, Zhang JF, Lu WW (2010) Effect of the degree of osteoporosis on the biomechanical anchoring strength of the sacral pedicle screws: an in vitro comparison between unaugmented bicortical screws and polymethylmethacrylate augmented unicortical screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(19):E925–E931. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c5fb21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thiele OC, Eckhardt C, Linke B, Schneider E, Lill CA (2007) Factors affecting the stability of screws in human cortical osteoporotic bone: a cadaver study. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89(5):701–705. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B5.18504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ryken TC, Clausen JD, Traynelis VC, Goel VK (1995) Biomechanical analysis of bone mineral density, insertion technique, screw torque, and holding strength of anterior cervical plate screws. J Neurosurg 83(2):325–329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang X, Ordway NR, Tan R, Rim BC, Fayyazi AH (2008) Correlation of ProDisc-C failure strength with cervical bone mineral content and endplate strength. J Spinal Disord Tech 21(6):400–405. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318157d382 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jiang Y, Zhao J, Augat P, Ouyang X, Lu Y, Majumdar S, Genant HK (1998) Trabecular bone mineral and calculated structure of human bone specimens scanned by peripheral quantitative computed tomography: relation to biomechanical properties. J Bone Miner Res 13(11):1783–1790. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.1998.13.11.1783 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ordway NR, Lu YM, Zhang X, Cheng CC, Fang H, Fayyazi AH (2007) Correlation of cervical endplate strength with CT measured subchondral bone density. Eur Spine J 16(12):2104–2109. doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0482-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goldstein SA (1987) The mechanical properties of trabecular bone: dependence on anatomic location and function. J Biomech 20(11–12):1055–1061 (pii:0021-9290(87)90023-6) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oxland TR, Lund T, Jost B, Cripton P, Lippuner K, Jaeger P, Nolte LP (1996) The relative importance of vertebral bone density and disc degeneration in spinal flexibility and interbody implant performance. An in vitro study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21(22):2558–2569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schnake K, Lucke M, Schroder R, Mittlmeier T (2001) Comparison between sheep and human cervical spines: an anatomic, radiographic, bone mineral density, and biomechanical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(9):1028–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Stemper BD, Baisden JL, Aktay R, Shender BS, Paskoff G (2006) Bone mineral density of human female cervical and lumbar spines from quantitative computed tomography. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(1):73–76 (pii:00007632-200601010-00017) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Genant HK, Cann CE, Ettinger B, Gordan GS (1982) Quantitative computed tomography of vertebral spongiosa: a sensitive method for detecting early bone loss after oophorectomy. Ann Intern Med 97(5):699–705CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Laval-Jeantet AM, Cann CE, Roger B, Dallant P (1984) A postprocessing dual energy technique for vertebral CT densitometry. J Comput Assist Tomogr 8(6):1164–1167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pitzen T, Schmitz B, Georg T, Barbier D, Beuter T, Steudel WI, Reith W (2004) Variation of endplate thickness in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J 13(3):235–240. doi: 10.1007/s00586-003-0648-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ritzel H, Amling M, Posl M, Hahn M, Delling G (1997) The thickness of human vertebral cortical bone and its changes in aging and osteoporosis: a histomorphometric analysis of the complete spinal column from thirty-seven autopsy specimens. J Bone Miner Res 12(1):89–95. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.1.89 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tubbs RS, Hallock JD, Radcliff V, Naftel RP, Mortazavi M, Shoja MM, Loukas M, Cohen-Gadol AA (2011) Ligaments of the craniocervical junction. J Neurosurg Spine 14(6):697–709. doi: 10.3171/2011.1.SPINE10612 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baba H, Furusawa N, Imura S, Kawahara N, Tsuchiya H, Tomita K (1993) Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Spine 18(15):2167–2173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bohlman HH, Emery SE, Goodfellow DB, Jones PK (1993) Robinson anterior cervical discectomy and arthrodesis for cervical radiculopathy. Long-term follow-up of one hundred and twenty-two patients. J Bone Jt Surg 75(9):1298–1307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Friedenberg ZB, Miller WT (1963) Degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine. J Bone Jt Surg 45:1171–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Iatridis JC, MacLean JJ, Roughley PJ, Alini M (2006) Effects of mechanical loading on intervertebral disc metabolism in vivo. J Bone Jt Surg 88(Suppl 2):41–46. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.01407 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stokes IA, Iatridis JC (2004) Mechanical conditions that accelerate intervertebral disc degeneration: overload versus immobilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(23):2724–2732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ellman R, Spatz J, Cloutier A, Palme R, Christiansen BA, Bouxsein ML (2013) Partial reductions in mechanical loading yield proportional changes in bone density, bone architecture, and muscle mass. J Bone Miner Res 28(4):875–885. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1814 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smith EL, Gilligan C (1996) Dose-response relationship between physical loading and mechanical competence of bone. Bone 18(1 Suppl):455–505PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Michalek AJ, Buckley MR, Bonassar LJ, Cohen I, Iatridis JC (2009) Measurement of local strains in intervertebral disc anulus fibrosus tissue under dynamic shear: contributions of matrix fiber orientation and elastin content. J Biomech 42(14):2279–2285. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.06.047 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jarvinen TL, Kannus P, Sievanen H (2003) Estrogen and bone—a reproductive and locomotive perspective. J Bone Miner Res 18(11):1921–1931. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.11.1921 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Havill LM, Mahaney MC, Binkley T, Specker BL (2007) Effects of genes, sex, age, and activity on BMC, bone size, and areal and volumetric BMD. J Bone Miner Res 22(5):737–746. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.070213 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Carter DR, Bouxsein ML, Marcus R (1992) New approaches for interpreting projected bone densitometry data. J Bone Miner Res 7(2):137–145. doi: 10.1002/jbmr.5650070204 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bonnick S (1998) Bone densitometry in clinical practice: application and interpretation. Humana, TotowaGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Anderst WJ, Donaldson WF 3rd, Lee JY, Kang JD (2015) Three-dimensional intervertebral kinematics in the healthy young adult cervical spine during dynamic functional loading. J Biomech. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.049 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yukawa Y, Kato F, Suda K, Yamagata M, Ueta T (2012) Age-related changes in osseous anatomy, alignment, and range of motion of the cervical spine. Part I: radiographic data from over 1,200 asymptomatic subjects. Eur Spine J 21(8):1492–1498. doi: 10.1007/s00586-012-2167-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ammann P, Rizzoli R (2003) Bone strength and its determinants. Osteoporos Int 14(Suppl 3):S13–S18. doi: 10.1007/s00198-002-1345-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Thaler M, Hartmann S, Gstottner M, Lechner R, Gabl M, Bach C (2013) Footprint mismatch in total cervical disc arthroplasty. Eur Spine J 22(4):759–765. doi: 10.1007/s00586-012-2594-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Grampp S, Genant HK, Mathur A, Lang P, Jergas M, Takada M, Gluer CC, Lu Y, Chavez M (1997) Comparisons of noninvasive bone mineral measurements in assessing age-related loss, fracture discrimination, and diagnostic classification. J Bone Miner Res 12(5):697–711. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.5.697 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Budoff MJ, Hamirani YS, Gao YL, Ismaeel H, Flores FR, Child J, Carson S, Nee JN, Mao S (2010) Measurement of thoracic bone mineral density with quantitative CT. Radiology 257(2):434–440. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10100132 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Budoff MJ, Khairallah W, Li D, Gao YL, Ismaeel H, Flores F, Child J, Carson S, Mao SS (2012) Trabecular bone mineral density measurement using thoracic and lumbar quantitative computed tomography. Acad Radiol 19(2):179–183. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2011.10.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zink PM (1996) Performance of ventral spondylodesis screws in cervical vertebrae of varying bone mineral density. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21(1):45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Eysel P, Schwitalle M, Oberstein A, Rompe JD, Hopf C, Kullmer K (1998) Preoperative estimation of screw fixation strength in vertebral bodies. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23(2):174–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Chapman JR, Harrington RM, Lee KM, Anderson PA, Tencer AF, Kowalski D (1996) Factors affecting the pullout strength of cancellous bone screws. J Biomech Eng 118(3):391–398CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ryken TC, Goel VK, Clausen JD, Traynelis VC (1995) Assessment of unicortical and bicortical fixation in a quasistatic cadaveric model. Role of bone mineral density and screw torque. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20(17):1861–1867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Heller JG, Estes BT, Zaouali M, Diop A (1996) Biomechanical study of screws in the lateral masses: variables affecting pull-out resistance. J Bone Jt Surg Am 78(9):1315–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • William J. Anderst
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tyler West
    • 1
  • William F. DonaldsonIII
    • 1
  • Joon Y. Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Orthopaedic Research LaboratoriesPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations