Journals / Eklem Hastalıkları ve Cerrahisi Dergisi (Eski Adı: Artroplasti Artroskopik Cerrahi Derg.) / 2006 / Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 3

Proksimal femur geometrisinin kemik mineral ölçümü bağlamında matematiksel modellenmesi

Mathematical modeling of proximal femur geometry and bone mineral density

Pages
128–136
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Least squares parameter estimation was used and errors of these models were assessed.Results: Linear mathematical models demonstrated the importance of the neck width measurements in assessing fracture risk.Conclusion: Our results suggest that femoral neck width is important and should be regarded as a risk factor when appropriate formula is used.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Bone mineral density measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is a major determinant of proximal femoral fractures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and methods: Fifty-eight healthy sedentary university students (age range 18 to 25 years) participated in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Least squares parameter estimation was used and errors of these models were assessed.Results: Linear mathematical models demonstrated the importance of the neck width measurements in assessing fracture risk.Conclusion: Our results suggest that femoral neck width is important and should be regarded as a risk factor when appropriate formula is used.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: Bone mineral density measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is a major determinant of proximal femoral fractures. In former studies, researchers considered the hip axis and femoral neck length as predictors of fracture risk and the width of the femoral neck was not considered. In this study, various functional relationships between density, length, and width were assessed using analytical models and numerical tests. Materials and methods: Fifty-eight healthy sedentary university students (age range 18 to 25 years) participated in the study. Bone mineral density was measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in five rotation positions, namely external 30°, external 15°, neutral 0°, internal 15°, and internal 30°. The length and width of the femoral neck was measured in each position. Three mathematical models were developed and assessed. Least squares parameter estimation was used and errors of these models were assessed.Results: Linear mathematical models demonstrated the importance of the neck width measurements in assessing fracture risk.Conclusion: Our results suggest that femoral neck width is important and should be regarded as a risk factor when appropriate formula is used.

Özet

Amaç: Kemik mineral yoğunluğu, çift enerjili X-ışını soğurma cihazı ile ölçüldüğünde kalça kemiği kırığının temel belirleyicilerinden biridir. Önceki çalışmalarda, araştırmacılar kalça ekseni ve uyluk kemiği boynunun uzunluğunu kırılma riskinin habercileri olarak görmüşlerdir; uyluk kemiği boynunun genişliği dikkate alınmamı ştır. Bu çalışmada, analitik model ve sayısal testler kullanılarak, yoğunluk, uzunluk ve genişlik arasındaki çeşitli işlevsel ilişkiler değerlendirildi. Gereç ve yöntem: Çalışmaya, yaşları 18-25 arasında değişen, sağlıklı 58 üniversite öğrencisi katıldı. Kemik mineral yoğunluğu, 30° dış, 15° dış, doğal 0°, iç 15° ve iç 30° dönme pozisyonlarında çift enerjili X-ışınları kullanılarak ölçüldü. Her pozisyonda uyluk kemiği boyun uzunluğu ve genişliği ölçüldü. Üç matematiksel model geliştirildi ve değerlendirildi. Asgari kare parametre tahmini kullanıldı ve üç matematiksel modelin hataları değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Doğrusal matematiksel modeller, kırık riskinin değerlendirilmesinde uyluk kemiği boyun genişliğinin önemini ölçümlerle göstermiştir.Sonuç: Bulgularımız, uygun formül kullanıldığında, femur boynu genişliğinin önemli olduğunu ve kırık için bir risk faktörü sayılması gerektiğini göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KORKUSUZ, F., KARASÖZEN, B., TAŞTAN, M., WEBER, G. W., ÇELİK, Ö. (2022). Proksimal femur geometrisinin kemik mineral ölçümü bağlamında matematiksel modellenmesi. Eklem Hastalıkları ve Cerrahisi Dergisi (Eski Adı: Artroplasti Artroskopik Cerrahi Derg.), Cilt: 17 - Sayı: 3, 128–136. https://ajindex.com/articles/498848

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Atik OS, Gunal I, Korkusuz F. Burden of osteoporosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;443:19-24
  2. Cheng XG, Lowet G, Boonen S, Nicholson PH, Brys P, Nijs J, et al. Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry. Bone 1997;20:213-8
  3. Audran M. Benefits, limitations, and impact of osteoporosis risk factor identification. Joint Bone Spine 2004;71:361-2
  4. Faulkner KG. The tale of the T-score: review and perspective. Osteoporos Int 2005;16:347-52
  5. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, Dawson A, De Laet C, Jonsson B. Ten year probabilities of osteoporotic fractures according to BMD and diagnostic thresholds. Osteoporos Int 2001;12:989-95
  6. Schonau E. The peak bone mass concept: is it still relevant? Pediatr Nephrol 2004;19:825-31
  7. Kroger H, Vainio P, Nieminen J, Kotaniemi A. Comparison of different models for interpreting bone mineral density measurements using DXA and MRI technology. Bone 1995;17:157-9
  8. Alonso CG, Curiel MD, Carranza FH, Cano RP, Perez AD. Femoral bone mineral density, neck-shaft angle and mean femoral neck width as predictors of hip fracture in men and women. Multicenter Project for Research in Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2000;11:714-20
  9. Dibba B, Prentice A, Laskey MA, Stirling DM, Cole TJ. An investigation of ethnic differences in bone mineral, hip axis length, calcium metabolism and bone turnover between West African and Caucasian adults living in the United Kingdom. Ann Hum Biol 1999;26:229-42
  10. Crabtree N, Lunt M, Holt G, Kroger H, Burger H, Grazio S, et al. Hip geometry, bone mineral distribution, and bone strength in European men and women: the EPOS study. Bone 2000;27:151-9
  11. Greendale GA, Young JT, Huang MH, Bucur A, Wang Y, Seeman T. Hip axis length in mid-life Japanese and Caucasian U.S. residents: no evidence for an ethnic difference. Osteoporos Int 2003;14:320-5
  12. Cummings SR, Cauley JA, Palermo L, Ross PD, Wasnich RD, Black D, et al. Racial differences in hip axis lengths might explain racial differences in rates of hip fracture. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Osteoporos Int 1994;4:226-9
  13. Faulkner KG, Cummings SR, Black D, Palermo L, Gluer CC, Genant HK. Simple measurement of femoral geometry predicts hip fracture: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 1993;8:1211-7
  14. Kukla C, Gaebler C, Pichl RW, Prokesch R, Heinze G, Heinz T. Predictive geometric factors in a standardized model of femoral neck frac