Comparison of nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy with dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the measurement of thoracic vertebral bone mineral density: Compressive force versus bone mineral

Abstract

31P nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMRS) measurements were made on human T2 and T3 vertebral bodies. The bone mineral content (BMC) of isolated vertebral bodies minus the posterior elements and disks was measured using (1) NMRS on a 3.5 T, 85 mm bore GE Medical Systems NT-150 superconducting spectrometer, (2) a Lunar Corporation DPX-L dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner in an anterior-posterior (AP) orientation, (3) a Norland Corporation XR26 DXA scanner, also in an AP direction, and (4) a Norland Corporation model 2600 dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) densitometer in both the AP and superior-inferior (SI) directions. Vertebral body volumes were measured using a water displacement technique to determine volume bone mineral densities (VBMD). They were then compressed to failure using an electrohydraulic testing device, followed by ashing in a muffle furnace at 700 degrees C for 18 h. Correlations of BMC between NMRS and DPA, DXA and ashing were excellent (0.96 < or = r < or = 0.99); in a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, means were not statistically different at a p level of 0.757. The correlations of VBMD between NMRS and the other methods were not as good (0.83 < or = r < or = 0.95); in a one-way ANOVA test, means were not statistically different at a p level of 0.089. BMC was a better predictor of ultimate compressive failure than VBMD for all six methods. For NMRS, the regression coefficient for BMC was r2 = 0.806, compared with r2 = 0.505 for VBMD. NMRS may prove an alternative to present methods of determining bone mineral.

From Density to Structure: Growing Up and Growing Old on the Surfaces of Bone

“…(77) Older women matched by areal bone density with younger women have 8% lower mean frequency of resonance in ulnar cortical bone, consistent with an age-related deterioration in a property of bone independent of areal bone density. (78) Histomorphometry, metacarpal morphometry, peripheral quantitative computed tomography, ultrasound, densitometry, fractal signature analysis, and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (79,80) have a role in quantifying the macro-and microarchitecture of bone mass, size, shape, structure, and quality, characteristics responsible for the strength of bone. The clinical relevance of these methods is established by how well they predict bone strength initially in vitro and then in vivo, not by how well one correlates with another.…”

Water Content Measured by Proton-Deuteron Exchange NMR Predicts Bone Mineral Density and Mechanical Properties

“…(25) Alternatively, treatment with antiresorptives such as bisphosphonates has been demonstrated to increase DMB. (26) To date, 31 P NMR is perhaps the only nondestructive and potentially noninvasive method for measuring mineral content either in bulk (27)(28)(29) or in a spatially resolved manner by imaging. (30 -33) However, the large linewidths on the order of 3-4 kHz (corresponding to T 2 ϳ 100 s) and long spin-lattice relaxation times (T 1 ϳ 20 -60 s) complicate imaging at a resolution sufficient to determine true DMB, which requires accurate volume measurements.…”

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Studies of Bone Water

“…The prospects of noninvasively imaging matrix and mineral constituents in solid bone by NMR is addressed as well. 31 P NMR is arguably the only nondestructive and potentially noninvasive method for measuring mineral content either in bulk 8,7,29,49 or in a spatially resolved manner by imaging. 1,27,47,48 Measurements of mineral content using 31 P spectroscopy rely on the notion that bone mineral content is proportional to phosphorus concentration.…”