Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site.
One outstanding issue regarding the relationship between elastic modulus and density for trabecular bone is whether the relationship depends on anatomic site. To address this, on-axis elastic moduli and apparent densities were measured for 142 specimens of human trabecular bone from the vertebra (n=61), proximal tibia (n=31), femoral greater trochanter (n=23), and femoral neck (n=27). Specimens were obtained from 61 cadavers (mean+/-SD age=67+/-15 years). Experimental protocols were used that minimized end-artifact errors and controlled for specimen orientation. Tissue moduli were computed for a subset of 18 specimens using high-resolution linear finite element analyses and also using two previously developed theoretical relationships (Bone 25 (1999) 481; J. Elasticity 53 (1999) 125). Resultant power law regressions between modulus and density did depend on anatomic site, as determined via an analysis of covariance. The inter-site differences were among the leading coefficients (p<0.02), but not the exponents (p>0.08), which ranged 1.49-2.18. At a given density, specimens from the tibia had higher moduli than those from the vertebra (p=0.01) and femoral neck (p=0.002); those from the trochanter had higher moduli than the vertebra (p=0.02). These differences could be as large as almost 50%, and errors in predicted values of modulus increased by up to 65% when site-dependence was ignored. These results indicate that there is no universal modulus-density relationship for on-axis loading. Tissue moduli computed using methods that account for inter-site architectural variations did not differ across site (p>0.15), suggesting that the site-specificity in apparent modulus-density relationships may be attributed to differences in architecture.
Morgan
Elise F
EF
Orthopaedic Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, 6175 Etcheverry Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720-1740, USA.
Bayraktar
Harun H
HH
Keaveny
Tony M
TM
D000368:Aged; D016880:Anisotropy; D015519:Bone Density / Q000502:physiology*; D001842:Bone and Bones / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000502:physiology*; D002102:Cadaver; D003198:Computer Simulation; D004548:Elasticity; D005260:Female; D005269:Femur / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology; D005272:Femur Neck / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D066298:In Vitro Techniques; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D008954:Models, Biological; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013223:Statistics as Topic; D013904:Thoracic Vertebrae / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology; D013977:Tibia / Q000033:anatomy & histology / Q000502:physiology