Bone microarchitecture and estimated failure load are deteriorated whether patients with chronic kidney disease have normal bone mineral density, osteopenia or osteoporosis

Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) is recommended in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, most persons in the community and most patients with CKD have osteopenia, suggesting fracture risk is low. Bone loss compromises bone microarchitecture which increases fragility dispropor...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bone (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2022-01, Vol.154, p.116260-116260, Article 116260
Hauptverfasser: Ghasem-Zadeh, Ali, Bui, Minh, Seeman, Ego, Boyd, Steven K., Iuliano, Sandra, Jaipurwala, Rizwan, Mount, Peter F., Toussaint, Nigel D., Chiang, Cherie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) is recommended in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, most persons in the community and most patients with CKD have osteopenia, suggesting fracture risk is low. Bone loss compromises bone microarchitecture which increases fragility disproportionate to modest deficits in BMD. We therefore hypothesized that patients with CKD have reduced estimated failure load due to deterioration in microarchitecture irrespective of whether they have normal femoral neck (FN) BMD, osteopenia or osteoporosis. We measured distal tibial and distal radial microarchitecture in 128 patients with CKD and 275 age- and sex-matched controls using high resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, FN-BMD using bone densitometry and estimated failure load at the distal appendicular sites using finite element analysis. Patients versus controls respectively had: lower tibial cortical area 219 (40.7) vs. 237 (35.3) mm2, p = 0.002, lower cortical volumetric BMD 543 (80.7) vs. 642 (81.7) mgHA/cm3 due to higher porosity 69.6 (6.19) vs. 61.9 (6.48)% and lower matrix mineral density 64.2 (0.62) vs. 65.1 (1.28)%, lower trabecular vBMD 92.2 (41.1) vs. 149 (43.0) mgHA/cm3 due to fewer and spatially disrupted trabeculae, lower FN-BMD 0.78 (0.12) vs. 0.94 (0.14) g/cm2 and reduced estimated failure load 3825 (1152) vs. 5778 (1467) N, all p 
ISSN:8756-3282
1873-2763
DOI:10.1016/j.bone.2021.116260