Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Application of Structural Rigidity Analysis to Assess Fidelity of Healed Fractures in Rat Femurs with Critical Defects

  • Published:
Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Approximately 6 million fractures occur each year in the United States, with an estimated medical and loss of productivity cost of $99 billion. As our population ages, it can only be expected that these numbers will continue to rise. While there have been recent advances in available treatments for fractures, assessment of the healing process remains a subjective process. This study aims to demonstrate the use of micro-computed tomography (μCT)-based structural rigidity analysis to accurately and quantitatively assess the progression of fracture healing over time in a rat model. The femora of rats with simulated lytic defects were injected with human BMP-2 cDNA at various time points postinjury (t = 0, 1, 5, 10 days) to accelerate fracture healing, harvested 56 days from time of injury, and subjected to μCT imaging to obtain cross-sectional data that were used to compute torsional rigidity. The specimens then underwent torsional testing to failure using a previously described pure torsional testing system. Strong correlations were found between measured torsional rigidity and computed torsional rigidity as calculated from both average (R 2 = 0.63) and minimum (R 2 = 0.81) structural rigidity data. While both methods were well correlated across the entire data range, minimum torsional rigidity was a better descriptor of bone strength, as seen by a higher Pearson coefficient and smaller y-intercept. These findings suggest considerable promise in the use of structural rigidity analysis of μCT data to accurately and quantitatively measure fracture-healing progression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Morshed S, Corrales L, Genant H, Miclau T 3rd (2008) Outcome assessment in clinical trials of fracture-healing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(Suppl 1):62–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Finkelstein EA, Corso PS, Miller TR (2006) The incidence and economic burden of injuries in the United States. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Barrett JA, Baron JA, Karagas MR, Beach ML (1999) Fracture risk in the U.S. Medicare population. J Clin Epidemiol 52:243–249

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Centers for Disease Control, Prevention (1996) Incidence and costs to Medicare of fractures among Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years—United States, July 1991–June 1992. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 45:877–883

    Google Scholar 

  5. Betz OB, Betz VM, Nazarian A, Pilapil CG, Vrahas MS, Bouxsein ML, Gerstenfeld LC, Einhorn TA, Evans CH (2006) Direct percutaneous gene delivery to enhance healing of segmental bone defects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:355–365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Firoozabadi R, Morshed S, Engelke K, Prevrhal S, Fierlinger A, Miclau T III, Genant HK (2008) Qualitative and quantitative assessment of bone fragility and fracture healing using conventional radiography and advanced imaging technologies—focus on wrist fracture. J Orthop Trauma 22:S83–S90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsuyama J, Ohnishi I, Sakai R, Bessho M, Matsumoto T, Miyasaka K, Harada A, Ohashi S, Nakamura K (2008) A new method for evaluation of fracture healing by echo tracking. Ultrasound Med Biol 34:775–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Duvall CL, Taylor WR, Weiss D, Wojtowicz AM, Guldberg RE (2007) Impaired angiogenesis, early callus formation, and late stage remodeling in fracture healing of osteopontin-deficient mice. J Bone Miner Res 22:286–297

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Schmidhammer R, Zandieh S, Mittermayr R, Pelinka LE, Leixnering M, Hopf R, Kroepfl A, Redl H (2006) Assessment of bone union/nonunion in an experimental model using microcomputed technology. J Trauma 61:199–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shefelbine SJ, Simon U, Claes L, Gold A, Gabet Y, Bab I, Muller R, Augat P (2005) Prediction of fracture callus mechanical properties using micro-CT images and voxel-based finite element analysis. Bone 36:480–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nyman JS, Munoz S, Jadhav S, Mansour A, Yoshii T, Mundy GR, Gutierrez GE (2009) Quantitative measures of femoral fracture repair in rats derived by micro-computed tomography. J Biomech 42:891–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Morgan EF, Mason ZD, Chien KB, Pfeiffer AJ, Barnes GL, Einhorn TA, Gerstenfeld LC (2009) Micro-computed tomography assessment of fracture healing: relationships among callus structure, composition, and mechanical function. Bone 44:335–344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hong J, Cabe GD, Tedrow JR, Hipp JA, Snyder BD (2004) Failure of trabecular bone with simulated lytic defects can be predicted non-invasively by structural analysis. J Orthop Res 22:479–486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Snyder BD, Cordio MA, Nazarian A, Kwak SD, Chang DJ, Entezari V, Zurakowski D, Parker LM (2009) Noninvasive prediction of fracture risk in patients with metastatic cancer to the spine. Clin Cancer Res 15(24):7676–7683

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Snyder BD, Hauser-Kara DA, Hipp JA, Zurakowski D, Hecht AC, Gebhardt MC (2006) Predicting fracture through benign skeletal lesions with quantitative computed tomography. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:55–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lai W, Rubin D (1993) Introduction to continuum mechanics. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  17. Martin RB (1991) Determinants of the mechanical properties of bones. J Biomech 24(Suppl 1):79–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Turner CH (2002) Determinants of skeletal fragility and bone quality. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 2:527–528

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Betz OB, Betz VM, Nazarian A, Egermann M, Gerstenfeld LC, Einhorn TA, Vrahas MS, Bouxsein ML, Evans CH (2007) Delayed administration of adenoviral BMP-2 vector improves the formation of bone in osseous defects. Gene Ther 14:1039–1044

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Einhorn TA, Lane JM, Burstein AH, Kopman CR, Vigorita VJ (1984) The healing of segmental bone defects induced by demineralized bone matrix. A radiographic and biomechanical study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66:274–279

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Alexander J, Bab I, Fish S, Müller R, Uchiyama T, Gronowicz G, Nahounou N, Zhao Q, White D, Chorev M, Gazit D, Rosenblatt M (2001) Human parathyroid hormone 1–34 reverses bone loss in ovariectomized mice. J Bone Min Res 16:1665–1673

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Cory E, Nazarian A, Entezari V, Vartanians V, Müller R, Snyder BD (2010) Compressive axial mechanical properties of rat bone as functions of bone volume fraction, apparent density and micro-CT based mineral density. J Biomech 43(5):953–960

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nazarian A, Entezari V, Vartanians V, Müller R, Snyder BD (2009) An improved method to assess torsional properties of rodent long bones. J Biomech 42(11):1720–1725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Whealan KM, Kwak SD, Tedrow JR, Inoue K, Snyder BD (2000) Noninvasive imaging predicts failure load of the spine with simulated osteolytic defects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:1240–1251

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nazarian A, Bauernschmitt M, Eberle C, Meier D, Muller R, Snyder BD (2008) Design and validation of a testing system to assess torsional cancellous bone failure in conjunction with time-lapsed micro-computed tomographic imaging. J Biomech 41:3496–3501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Augat P, Merk J, Genant HK, Claes L (1997) Quantitative assessment of experimental fracture repair by peripheral computed tomography. Calcif Tissue Int 60:194–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. den Boer FC, Bramer JA, Patka P, Bakker FC, Barentsen RH, Feilzer AJ, de Lange ES, Haarman HJ (1998) Quantification of fracture healing with three-dimensional computed tomography. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 117:345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Jamsa T, Koivukangas A, Kippo K, Hannuniemi R, Jalovaara P, Tuukkanen J (2000) Comparison of radiographic and pQCT analyses of healing rat tibial fractures. Calcif Tissue Int 66:288–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kokoroghiannis C, Charopoulos I, Lyritis G, Raptou P, Karachalios T, Papaioannou N (2009) Correlation of pQCT bone strength index with mechanical testing in distraction osteogenesis. Bone 45:512–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the National Institutes of Health (R01 award AR050243, to C. H. E.) for funding a portion of this study. Additionally, the authors acknowledge the insightful comments made by the reviewer.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ara Nazarian.

Additional information

The authors have stated that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nazarian, A., Pezzella, L., Tseng, A. et al. Application of Structural Rigidity Analysis to Assess Fidelity of Healed Fractures in Rat Femurs with Critical Defects. Calcif Tissue Int 86, 397–403 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-010-9353-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-010-9353-4

Keywords

Navigation