2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.11.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of methods for in vivo assessment of cortical porosity in the human appendicular skeleton

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
27
2

Year Published

2017
2017
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(41 reference statements)
1
27
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, regional analyses within the same bony compartment may help clarify the porosity‐strength relationship during growth, in future . Third, the resolution of HR‐pQCT may be insufficient to accurately assess porosity at the distal end of the radius where the cortical shell is quite thin; thereby, systemically underestimating cortical porosity, an explanation offered by Vilayphiou and colleagues . Finally, it is possible that FE estimates of bone strength do not capture changes in porosity that contribute to transient increases in bone fragility.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, regional analyses within the same bony compartment may help clarify the porosity‐strength relationship during growth, in future . Third, the resolution of HR‐pQCT may be insufficient to accurately assess porosity at the distal end of the radius where the cortical shell is quite thin; thereby, systemically underestimating cortical porosity, an explanation offered by Vilayphiou and colleagues . Finally, it is possible that FE estimates of bone strength do not capture changes in porosity that contribute to transient increases in bone fragility.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…Further, the threshold-based approach for detection of cortical porosity likely underestimated cortical porosity. In particular, although the accuracy of assessment of pores >140 μm is excellent, (34) the threshold-based cortical porosity measurement that we used may have missed very small pores and therefore underestimated the absolute value of porosity. However, given the very strong association between threshold-based porosity measurements and those from synchrotron radiation μCT ( r 2 = 0.94), (34) we argue that the associations between cortical porosity and VAT would likely be similar to what we report here if one were to employ imaging with improved resolution and/or use a density-based approach to assess cortical porosity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Alternatively, it is also possible that the differences in cortical porosity between T2D and non‐T2D were underestimated in our study because standard HR‐pQCT analyses cannot detect cortical pores less than 100 μm in diameter. However, the impact of small pores on whole bone strength remains to be elucidated …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%