Hamdan Medical Journal (previously the Journal of Medical Sciences)

Table of Contents  

Bone ‘Quality’ – The Material and Structural Basis of Bone Strength

Ego Seeman
Published in : Journal of Medical Sciences ; Vol 3, No 2 (2010)
DOI : 10.2174/1996327001003020087

Abstract


The material and structural properties of bone determine its strength. Bone must be stiff — resistant to bending therefore mobility and loading are possible. Bone tissue must also be elastic — able to absorb energy imparted during loading by deforming and returning to the same length without damage. These contradictory properties are achieved by varying the mineral content of the collagen tissue of bone; if under-mineralized the tissue may be too flexible, if over mineralized it may become too brittle. These properties are also achieved by structural design. Tubular bones have the mineralized cortex placed distant from the long axis to increase resistance to bending. In the vertebrae, trabecular bone, an open porous structure, allows greater deformation for absorption of energy like a spring but the peak tolerated loads are lower than in the long bones. These material and structural properties are maintained by bone remodeling and become compromised when remodeling becomes too fast, too slow or unbalanced. Understanding of the pathogenesis of bone fragility, its prevention and reversal depend on finding ways of measuring these properties of bone in vivo.

Keywords


Bone architecture; bone fragility; bone quality; bone strength; bone

View article in  :   PDF    

References


Currey JD. The mechanical adaptations of bones. Princeton University press. Princeton New Jersey. 1984; Chapter 1 1-36.

Currey JD. The mechanical consequences of variation in the mineral content of bone. J Biomech 1969; 2: 1-11.

Currey JD. The design of mineralized hard tissues for their mechanical functions. J Exp Biol 1999; 202: 3285-94.

Ruff CB, Hayes WC. Sex differences in age-related remodeling of the femur and tibia. J Orthop Res 1988; 6: 886-96.

Lu PW, Cowell CT, Lloyd-Jones SA, Briody J, Howman- Giles R. Volumetric bone mineral density in normal subjects, aged 5-27 years. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1996; 81: 1586-90.

Gilsanz V, Gibbens DT, Roe TF, Carlson M, Senac MO, Boechat MI, et al. Vertebral bone density in children: Effect of puberty. Radiology 1988; 166: 847-50.

Lips P, Courpron P, Meunier PJ. Mean wall thickness of trabecular bone packets in the human iliac crest: changes with age. Calcif Tissue Res 1978; 10: 13-17.

Seeman E. During aging, men lose less bone than women because they gain more periosteal bone, not because they resorb less endosteal bone. Calcif Tissue Int 2001; 69: 205-58.

Aaron JE, Makins NB, Sagreiya K. The microanatomy of trabecular bone loss in normal aging men and women. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987; 215: 260-71.

Fyhrie DP, Schaffler MB. Failure mechanisms in human vertebral cancellous bone. Bone 1994; 15: 105-9.

Seeman E. Pathogenesis of bone fragility in women and men. Lancet 2002; 359: 1841-50.

Duan Y, Turner CH, Kim BT, Seeman E. Sexual dimorphism in vertebral fragility is more the result of gender differences in age-related bone gain than bone loss. J Bone Miner Res 2001; 16: 2267-75.

Kalender WA, Felsenberg D, Louis O, Lopez P, Klotz E, Osteaux M, et al. Reference values for trabecular and cortical vertebral bone density in single and dual-energy quantitative computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 1989; 9: 75-80.





Add comment 





Home  Editorial Board  Search  Current Issue  Archive Issues  Announcements  Aims & Scope  About the Journal  How to Submit  Contact Us
Find out how to become a part of the HMJ  |   CLICK HERE >>
© Copyright 2012 - 2013 HMJ - HAMDAN Medical Journal. All Rights Reserved         Website Developed By Cedar Solutions INDIA