Ankle Joint Bone Density Distribution Correlates with Overall 3-Dimensional Foot and Ankle Alignment.
Journal
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
ISSN: 1535-1386
Titre abrégé: J Bone Joint Surg Am
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0014030
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 11 2023
15 11 2023
Historique:
medline:
27
11
2023
pubmed:
24
8
2023
entrez:
24
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Altered stress distribution in the lower limb may impact bone mineral density (BMD) in the ankle bones. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the spatial distribution of BMD with use of weight-bearing cone-beam computed tomography (WBCT). Our hypothesis was that BMD distribution would be even in normal hindfeet, increased medially in varus hindfeet, and increased laterally in valgus hindfeet. In this study, 27 normally aligned hindfeet were retrospectively compared with 27 valgus and 27 varus-aligned hindfeet. Age (p = 0.967), body mass index (p = 0.669), sex (p = 0.820), and side (p = 0.708) were similar in the 3 groups. Hindfoot alignment was quantified on the basis of WBCT data sets with use of multiple measurements. BMD was calculated with use of the mean Hounsfield unit (HU) value as a surrogate. The HU medial-to-lateral ratio (HUR), calculated from tibial and talar medial and lateral half-volumes, was the primary outcome of the study. The 3 groups significantly differed (p < 0.001) in terms of tibial HUR (median, 0.91 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.75 to 0.98] in valgus hindfeet, 1 [IQR, 0.94 to 1.05] in normal hindfeet, and 1.04 [IQR, 0.99 to 1.1] in varus hindfeet) and talar HUR (0.74 [IQR, 0.50 to 0.80] in valgus hindfeet, 0.82 [IQR, 0.76 to 0.87] in normal hindfeet, and 0.92 [IQR, 0.86 to 1.05] in varus hindfeet). Linear regression showed that all hindfoot measurements significantly correlated with tibial and talar HUR (p < 0.001 for all). The mean HU values for normally-aligned hindfeet were 495.2 ± 110 (medial tibia), 495.6 ± 108.1 (lateral tibia), 368.9 ± 80.3 (medial talus), 448.2 ± 90.6 (lateral talus), and 686.7 ± 120.4 (fibula). The mean HU value for each compartment was not significantly different across groups. Hindfoot alignment and medial-to-lateral BMD distribution were correlated. In varus hindfeet, an increased HU medial-to-lateral ratio was consistent with a greater medial bone density in the tibia and talus as compared with the lateral parts of these bones. In valgus hindfeet, a decreased ratio suggested greater bone density in the lateral as compared with the medial parts of both the tibia and the talus. Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Altered stress distribution in the lower limb may impact bone mineral density (BMD) in the ankle bones. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the spatial distribution of BMD with use of weight-bearing cone-beam computed tomography (WBCT). Our hypothesis was that BMD distribution would be even in normal hindfeet, increased medially in varus hindfeet, and increased laterally in valgus hindfeet.
METHODS
In this study, 27 normally aligned hindfeet were retrospectively compared with 27 valgus and 27 varus-aligned hindfeet. Age (p = 0.967), body mass index (p = 0.669), sex (p = 0.820), and side (p = 0.708) were similar in the 3 groups. Hindfoot alignment was quantified on the basis of WBCT data sets with use of multiple measurements. BMD was calculated with use of the mean Hounsfield unit (HU) value as a surrogate. The HU medial-to-lateral ratio (HUR), calculated from tibial and talar medial and lateral half-volumes, was the primary outcome of the study.
RESULTS
The 3 groups significantly differed (p < 0.001) in terms of tibial HUR (median, 0.91 [interquartile range (IQR), 0.75 to 0.98] in valgus hindfeet, 1 [IQR, 0.94 to 1.05] in normal hindfeet, and 1.04 [IQR, 0.99 to 1.1] in varus hindfeet) and talar HUR (0.74 [IQR, 0.50 to 0.80] in valgus hindfeet, 0.82 [IQR, 0.76 to 0.87] in normal hindfeet, and 0.92 [IQR, 0.86 to 1.05] in varus hindfeet). Linear regression showed that all hindfoot measurements significantly correlated with tibial and talar HUR (p < 0.001 for all). The mean HU values for normally-aligned hindfeet were 495.2 ± 110 (medial tibia), 495.6 ± 108.1 (lateral tibia), 368.9 ± 80.3 (medial talus), 448.2 ± 90.6 (lateral talus), and 686.7 ± 120.4 (fibula). The mean HU value for each compartment was not significantly different across groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Hindfoot alignment and medial-to-lateral BMD distribution were correlated. In varus hindfeet, an increased HU medial-to-lateral ratio was consistent with a greater medial bone density in the tibia and talus as compared with the lateral parts of these bones. In valgus hindfeet, a decreased ratio suggested greater bone density in the lateral as compared with the medial parts of both the tibia and the talus.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37616414
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00180
pii: 00004623-202311150-00008
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1801-1811Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article ( http://links.lww.com/JBJS/H656 ).
Références
Rozental TD, Merchan N, Johannesdottir F, Lechtig A, Earp BE, Harper CM, Bouxsein ML. Longitudinal Changes in Serum Markers of Bone Metabolism and Bone Material Strength in Premenopausal Women with Distal Radial Fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Jan 5;104(1):15-23.
Ruff C, Holt B, Trinkaus E. Who’s afraid of the big bad Wolff?: “Wolff’s law” and bone functional adaptation. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Apr;129(4):484-98.
Donnelly E. Methods for assessing bone quality: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Aug;469(8):2128-38.
Aamodt A, Kvistad KA, Andersen E, Lund-Larsen J, Eine J, Benum P, Husby OS. Determination of Hounsfield value for CT-based design of custom femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Jan;81(1):143-7.
Blaha JD; Effects on Primary Femoral Stem Stability and Clinical Recovery”. Bone Strength and Viscoelasticity Affect Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation: Commentary on an article by Hannu T. Aro, MD, PhD, et al.: “Volumetric Bone Mineral Density in Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty in Postmenopausal Women. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021 Jun 16;103(12):e49.
Chalhoub D, Orwoll ES, Cawthon PM, Ensrud KE, Boudreau R, Greenspan S, Newman AB, Zmuda J, Bauer D, Cummings S, Cauley JA; Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study Research Group. Areal and volumetric bone mineral density and risk of multiple types of fracture in older men. Bone. 2016 Nov;92:100-6.
Mozzo P, Procacci C, Tacconi A, Martini PT, Andreis IA. A new volumetric CT machine for dental imaging based on the cone-beam technique: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 1998;8(9):1558-64.
Yong TH, Yang S, Lee SJ, Park C, Kim JE, Huh KH, Lee SS, Heo MS, Yi WJ. QCBCT-NET for direct measurement of bone mineral density from quantitative cone-beam CT: a human skull phantom study. Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 23;11(1):15083.
Slaidina A, Nikitina E, Abeltins A, Soboleva U, Lejnieks A. Gray values of the cervical vertebrae detected by cone beam computed tomography for the identification of osteoporosis and osteopenia in postmenopausal women. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2022 Jan;133(1):100-9.
Parsa A, Ibrahim N, Hassan B, van der Stelt P, Wismeijer D. Bone quality evaluation at dental implant site using multislice CT, micro-CT, and cone beam CT. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(1):e1-7.
Patrick S, Birur NP, Gurushanth K, Raghavan AS, Gurudath S. Comparison of gray values of cone-beam computed tomography with Hounsfield units of multislice computed tomography: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2017 Jan-Feb;28(1):66-70.
Rai S, Misra D, Misra A. Cone-beam computed tomography assessment of bone using grayscale values in patients with diabetes mellitus. A case-control observational study. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2020 Nov-Dec;24(6):560-6.
Sennerby L, Andersson P, Pagliani L, Giani C, Moretti G, Molinari M, Motroni A. Evaluation of a Novel Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanner for Bone Density Examinations in Preoperative 3D Reconstructions and Correlation with Primary Implant Stability. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Oct;17(5):844-53.
Noaman AT, Bede SY. The Effect of Bone Density Measured by Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Implant Dimensions on the Stability of Dental Implants. J Craniofac Surg. 2022 Sep 1;33(6):e553-7.
Fuster-Torres MÁ, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Peñarrocha-Diago M. Relationships between bone density values from cone beam computed tomography, maximum insertion torque, and resonance frequency analysis at implant placement: a pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Sep-Oct;26(5):1051-6.
Bhattacharyya S, Choudhury S, Datta P, Pal AK, Roy S, Chatterjee R, De R, Chakraborty A, Saha S, Chowdhury AR. Assessment of Jaw Bone Quality for Designing Patient-Specific Dental Implant Using Computed Tomography Data. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2021;31(1):49-58.
Bhavsar NV, Trivedi SR, Dulani K, Brahmbhatt N, Shah S, Chaudhri D. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of effect of risedronate 5 mg as an adjunct to treatment of chronic periodontitis in postmenopausal women (12-month study). Osteoporos Int. 2016 Aug;27(8):2611-9.
de Castro JGK, Carvalho BF, de Melo NS, de Souza Figueiredo PT, Moreira-Mesquita CR, de Faria Vasconcelos K, Jacobs R, Leite AF. A new cone-beam computed tomography-driven index for osteoporosis prediction. Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Sep;24(9):3193-202.
Barg A, Bailey T, Richter M, de Cesar Netto C, Lintz F, Burssens A, Phisitkul P, Hanrahan CJ, Saltzman CL. Weightbearing Computed Tomography of the Foot and Ankle: Emerging Technology Topical Review. Foot Ankle Int. 2018 Mar;39(3):376-86.
Richter M, Lintz F, de Cesar Netto C, Barg A, Burssens A. Results of more than 11,000 scans with weightbearing CT - Impact on costs, radiation exposure, and procedure time. Foot Ankle Surg. 2020;26(5):518-522.
Lintz F, Welck M, Bernasconi A, Thornton J, Cullen NP, Singh D, Goldberg A. 3D Biometrics for Hindfoot Alignment Using Weightbearing CT. Foot Ankle Int. 2017 Jun;38(6):684-9.
de Cesar Netto C, Godoy-Santos AL, Saito GH, Lintz F, Siegler S, O’Malley MJ, Deland JT, Ellis SJ. Subluxation of the Middle Facet of the Subtalar Joint as a Marker of Peritalar Subluxation in Adult Acquired Flatfoot Deformity: A Case-Control Study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Oct 16;101(20):1838-44.
Sangeorzan BJ, Hintermann B, de Cesar Netto C, Day J, Deland JT, Ellis SJ, Johnson JE, Myerson MS, Schon LC, Thordarson DB. Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity: Consensus on Goals for Operative Correction. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Oct;41(10):1299-302.
Bhimani R, Ashkani-Esfahani S, Lubberts B, Guss D, Hagemeijer NC, Waryasz G, DiGiovanni CW. Utility of Volumetric Measurement via Weight-Bearing Computed Tomography Scan to Diagnose Syndesmotic Instability. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Jul;41(7):859-65.
Castillo AB, Leucht P. Bone Homeostasis and Repair: Forced Into Shape. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2015 Sep;17(9):58.
Stief F, Böhm H, Dussa CU, Multerer C, Schwirtz A, Imhoff AB, Döderlein L. Effect of lower limb malalignment in the frontal plane on transverse plane mechanics during gait in young individuals with varus knee alignment. Knee. 2014 Jun;21(3):688-93.
Lintz F, Mast J, Bernasconi A, Mehdi N, de Cesar Netto C, Fernando C, Buedts K; International Weight-Bearing CT Society. 3D, Weightbearing Topographical Study of Periprosthetic Cysts and Alignment in Total Ankle Replacement. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Jan;41(1):1-9.
Chandler JT, Moskal JT. Evaluation of knee and hindfoot alignment before and after total knee arthroplasty: a prospective analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2004 Feb;19(2):211-6.
Braito M, Dammerer D, Reinthaler A, Kaufmann G, Huber D, Biedermann R. Effect of Coronal and Sagittal Alignment on Outcome After Mobile-Bearing Total Ankle Replacement. Foot Ankle Int. 2015 Sep;36(9):1029-37.
Hobson SA, Karantana A, Dhar S. Total ankle replacement in patients with significant pre-operative deformity of the hindfoot. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Apr;91(4):481-6.
Lintz F, Welck M, Kristian B. Fernando, Celine, Netto, Cesar de Cesar, Bernasconi, Alessio. Distribution of Bone Mineral Density in the Ankle Joint: Correlation with Hindfoot Alignment. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2022;21(7):1.
Arena CB, Sripanich Y, Leake R, Saltzman CL, Barg A. Assessment of Hindfoot Alignment Comparing Weightbearing Radiography to Weightbearing Computed Tomography. Foot Ankle Int. 2021 Nov;42(11):1482-90.
Saltzman CL, el-Khoury GY. The hindfoot alignment view. Foot Ankle Int. 1995 Sep;16(9):572-6.
Zhang JZ, Lintz F, Bernasconi A, Zhang S; Weight Bearing CT International Study Group. 3D Biometrics for Hindfoot Alignment Using Weightbearing Computed Tomography. Foot Ankle Int. 2019 Jun;40(6):720-6.
de Cesar Netto C, Bang K, Mansur NS, Garfinkel JH, Bernasconi A, Lintz F, Deland JT, Ellis SJ. Multiplanar Semiautomatic Assessment of Foot and Ankle Offset in Adult Acquired Flatfoot Deformity. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Jul;41(7):839-48.
Carrara C, Belvedere C, Caravaggi P, Durante S, Leardini A. Techniques for 3D foot bone orientation angles in weight-bearing from cone-beam computed tomography. Foot Ankle Surg. 2021 Feb;27(2):168-74.
Bernasconi A, Cooper L, Lyle S, Patel S, Cullen N, Singh D, Welck M. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of cone beam weightbearing semi-automatic three-dimensional measurements in symptomatic pes cavovarus. Foot Ankle Surg. 2020 Jul;26(5):564-72.
de Carvalho KAM, Walt JS, Ehret A, Tazegul TE, Dibbern K, Mansur NSB, Lalevée M, de Cesar Netto C. Comparison between Weightbearing-CT semiautomatic and manual measurements in Hallux Valgus. Foot Ankle Surg. 2022 Jun;28(4):518-525.
Richter M, Schilke R, Duerr F, Zech S, Andreas Meissner S, Naef I. Automatic software-based 3D-angular measurement for Weight-Bearing CT (WBCT) provides different angles than measurement by hand. Foot Ankle Surg. 2022 Oct;28(7):863-871.
Behrens A, Dibbern K, Lalevée M, Alencar Mendes de Carvalho K, Lintz F, Barbachan Mansur NS, de Cesar Netto C. Coverage maps demonstrate 3D Chopart joint subluxation in weightbearing CT of progressive collapsing foot deformity. Sci Rep. 2022 Nov 12;12(1):19367.
Bernasconi A, De Cesar Netto C, Siegler S, Jepsen M, Lintz F; International Weight-Bearing CT Society. Weightbearing CT assessment of foot and ankle joints in Pes Planovalgus using distance mapping. Foot Ankle Surg. 2022 Aug;28(6):775-84.
de Cesar Netto C, Myerson MS, Day J, Ellis SJ, Hintermann B, Johnson JE, Sangeorzan BJ, Schon LC, Thordarson DB, Deland JT. Consensus for the Use of Weightbearing CT in the Assessment of Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Oct;41(10):1277-82.
Myerson MS, Thordarson DB, Johnson JE, Hintermann B, Sangeorzan BJ, Deland JT, Schon LC, Ellis SJ, de Cesar Netto C. Classification and Nomenclature: Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Oct;41(10):1271-6.
Chang S, Lee SC. A Comparative Study on the Voxel Values in Alveolar Bones Acquired by MDCT and Newly Developed Dental Dual-Energy CBCT. Sensors (Basel). 2021 Nov 13;21(22):7552.
Richter M, Seidl B, Zech S, Hahn S. PedCAT for 3D-imaging in standing position allows for more accurate bone position (angle) measurement than radiographs or CT. Foot Ankle Surg. 2014 Sep;20(3):201-7.
Day J, de Cesar Netto C, Richter M, Mansur NS, Fernando C, Deland JT, Ellis SJ, Lintz F. Evaluation of a Weightbearing CT Artificial Intelligence-Based Automatic Measurement for the M1-M2 Intermetatarsal Angle in Hallux Valgus. Foot Ankle Int. 2021 Nov;42(11):1502-9.
Richter M, Duerr F, Schilke R, Zech S, Meissner SA, Naef I. Semi-automatic software-based 3D-angular measurement for Weight-Bearing CT (WBCT) in the foot provides different angles than measurement by hand. Foot Ankle Surg. 2022 Oct;28(7):919-927.
Morgan EF, Gleason RE, Hayward LNM, Leong PL, Palomares KTS. Mechanotransduction and fracture repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(Suppl 1):25-30.
Norton AA, Callaghan JJ, Amendola A, Phisitkul P, Wongsak S, Liu SS, Fruehling-Wall C. Correlation of knee and hindfoot deformities in advanced knee OA: compensatory hindfoot alignment and where it occurs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Jan;473(1):166-74.
Dagneaux L, Dufrenot M, Bernasconi A, Bedard NA, de Cesar Netto C, Lintz F. Three-Dimensional Biometrics to Correlate Hindfoot and Knee Coronal Alignments Using Modern Weightbearing Imaging. Foot Ankle Int. 2020 Nov;41(11):1411-1418.
Ismail A, Lakschevitz F, MacDonald D, Ford NL. Measurement Accuracy in Cone Beam Computed Tomography in the Presence of Metal Artifact. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2022 Jan-Feb;37(1):143-52.
Gang GJ, Stayman JW. Universal orbit design for metal artifact elimination. Phys Med Biol. 2022 May 23;67(11).
Michalski AS, Besler BA, Burt LA, Boyd SK. Opportunistic CT screening predicts individuals at risk of major osteoporotic fracture. Osteoporos Int. 2021 Aug;32(8):1639-1649. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05863-0.
doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05863-0