Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 10 | Pages 584 - 589
1 Oct 2017
den Teuling J Pauwels B Janssen L Wyers C Janzing HMJ van den Bergh J Morrenhof JW

Objectives. The goal of this study is to investigate the relation between indicators of osteoporosis (i.e., bone mineral density (BMD), and Cortical Index (CI)) and the complexity of a fracture of the proximal humerus as a result of a low-energy trauma. Methods. A retrospective chart review of 168 patients (mean age 67.2 years, range 51 to 88.7) with a fracture of the proximal humerus between 2007 and 2011, whose BMD was assessed at the Fracture Liaison Service with Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of the hip, femoral neck (FN) and/or lumbar spine (LS), and whose CI and complexity of fracture were assessed on plain anteroposterior radiographs of the proximal humerus. Results. No significant differences were found between simple and complex fractures of the proximal humerus in the BMD of the hip, FN or LS (all p > 0.3) or in the CI (p = 0.14). Only the body mass index was significantly higher in patients with a complex fracture compared with those with a simple fracture (26.9 vs 25.2; p = 0.05). Conclusion. There was no difference in BMD of the hip, FN, LS or CI of the proximal humerus in simple compared with complex fractures of the proximal humerus after a low-energy trauma. Factors other than the BMD and CI, for example body mass index, may play a more important role in the complexity of this fracture. Cite this article: J.W.A.M. den Teuling, B.S. Pauwels, L. Janssen, C.E. Wyers, H. M. J. Janzing, J.P.W. van den Bergh, J. W. Morrenhof. The Influence of bone mineral density and cortical index on the complexity of fractures of the proximal humerus. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:584–589. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.610.BJR-2017-0080


Objectives. This investigation sought to advance the work published in our prior biomechanical study (Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 2016). We specifically sought to determine whether there are additional easy-to-measure parameters on plain radiographs of the proximal humerus that correlate more strongly with ultimate fracture load, and whether a parameter resembling the Dorr strength/quality characterisation of proximal femurs can be applied to humeri. Materials and Methods. A total of 33 adult humeri were used from a previous study where we quantified bone mineral density of the proximal humerus using radiographs and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), and regional mean cortical thickness and cortical index using radiographs. The bones were fractured in a simulated backwards fall with the humeral head loaded at 2 mm/second via a frustum angled at 30° from the long axis of the bone. Correlations were assessed with ultimate fracture load and these new parameters: cortical index expressed in areas (“areal cortical index”) of larger regions of the diaphysis; the canal-to-calcar ratio used analogous to its application in proximal femurs; and the recently described medial cortical ratio. Results. The three new parameters showed the following correlations with ultimate fracture load: areal cortical index (r = 0.56, p < 0.001); canal-to-calcar ratio (r = 0.38, p = 0.03); and medial cortical ratio (r = 0.49, p < 0.005). These correlations were weaker when compared with those that we previously reported: mean cortical thickness of the proximal diaphysis versus ultimate fracture load (r = 0.71; p < 0.001); and mean density in the central humeral head versus ultimate fracture load (r = 0.70; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Simple-to-measure radiographic parameters of the proximal humerus reported previously are more useful in predicting ultimate fracture load than are areal cortical index, canal-to-calcar ratio, and medial cortical ratio. Cite this article: J. G. Skedros, C. S. Mears, W. Z. Burkhead. Ultimate fracture load of cadaver proximal humeri correlates more strongly with mean combined cortical thickness than with areal cortical index, DEXA density, or canal-to-calcar ratio. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:1–7. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.61.BJR-2016-0145.R1