Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 92-B, Issue 3 | Pages 329 - 334
1 Mar 2010
Cox G Einhorn TA Tzioupis C Giannoudis PV

Biochemical markers of bone-turnover have long been used to complement the radiological assessment of patients with metabolic bone disease. Their implementation in daily clinical practice has been helpful in the understanding of the pathogenesis of osteoporosis, the selection of the optimal dose and the understanding of the progression of the onset and resolution of treatment. Since they are derived from both cortical and trabecular bone, they reflect the metabolic activity of the entire skeleton rather than that of individual cells or the process of mineralisation.

Quantitative changes in skeletal-turnover can be assessed easily and non-invasively by the measurement of bone-turnover markers. They are commonly subdivided into three categories; 1) bone-resorption markers, 2) osteoclast regulatory proteins and 3) bone-formation markers. Because of the rapidly accumulating new knowledge of bone matrix biochemistry, attempts have been made to use them in the interpretation and characterisation of various stages of the healing of fractures. Early knowledge of the individual progress of a fracture could help to avoid delayed or nonunion by enabling modification of the host’s biological response.

The levels of bone-turnover markers vary throughout the course of fracture repair with their rates of change being dependent on the size of the fracture and the time that it will take to heal. However, their short-term biological variability, the relatively low bone specificity exerted, given that the production and destruction of collagen is not limited to bone, as well as the influence of the host’s metabolism on their concentration, produce considerable intra- and inter-individual variability in their interpretation. Despite this, the possible role of bone-turnover markers in the assessment of progression to union, the risks of delayed or nonunion and the impact of innovations to accelerate fracture healing must not be ignored.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 88-B, Issue 6 | Pages 701 - 705
1 Jun 2006
Simpson AHRW Mills L Noble B


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 6 | Pages 749 - 754
1 Jun 2005
Giannoudis PV Parker J Wilcox MH