Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T14:07:01.899Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Correlation of quantitative ultrasound measurements with material properties and bone mineral density in the equine metacarpus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

G Whan ,
J Runciman  and
M Hurtig
G Whan
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
J Runciman
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
M Hurtig*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Studies, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, N1G 2W1
*
*[email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study explored the relationship between speed-of-sound (SOS) measurements and the material properties of metacarpal bones in order to validate a device that uses linear unicortical transmission of ultrasound. SOS, ultimate tensile strength and modulus of elasticity were determined at nine experimental sites. Measurements of SOS and bone mineral density were collected at three of the nine experimental sites. Twenty-five equine metacarpal (MC3) bones were used. Micro-computerized tomography was used to validate testing protocols. SOS measurements were highly site- and horse-dependent. One or more statistically significant correlations were found with ultimate tensile strength, modulus of elasticity and bone mineral density in four of the nine experimental sites. A previously described pattern of high lateral and medial cortical stiffness and SOS was found in the mid-diaphysis that correlated with bone mineral density (r2=0.25, P<0.01) and modulus of elasticity (r2=0.14, P<0.05). SOS and ultimate tensile strength correlated strongly in the distal dorsal metacarpus (r2=0.47, P<0.001). Lateral and medial distal-level sites just above the fetlock joint had a variable amount of cancellous bone, reducing the ultimate strength of these sites. The study indicates that quantitative ultrasound is sensitive to differences in the quality of equine metacarpal bone, so this technique may be useful for monitoring adaptation to exercise and bone development.

Keywords

equine metacarpusultrasoundbiomechanical testingbone mineral density
Type
Research Article
Information
Equine and Comparative Exercise Physiology , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , February 2004 , pp. 61 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Estberg, L, Stover, SM, Gardner, IA, Johnson, BJ, Case, JT, Ardans, A, et al. (1996). Fatal musculoskeletal injuries incurred during racing and training in Thoroughbreds. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 208(1): 92–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Les, CM, Stover, SM, Keyak, JH, Taylor, KT and Kaneps, AJ (2002). Stiff and strong compressive properties are associated with brittle post-yield behavior in equine compact bone material. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 20(3): 607–614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Les, CM, Stover, SM, Taylor, KT, Keyak, JH and Willits, NH (1998). Ex vivo simulation of in vivo strain distributions in the equine metacarpus. Equine Veterinary Journal 30(3): 260–266.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Les, CM, Keyak, JH, Stover, SM and Taylor, KT (1997). Development and validation of a series of three-dimensional finite element models of the equine metacarpus. Journal of Biomechanics 30(7): 737–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Les, CM, Stover, SM, Keyak, JH, Taylor, KT and Willits, NH (1997). The distribution of material properties in the equine third metacarpal bone serves to enhance sagittal bending. Journal of Biomechanics 30(4): 355–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Les, CM, Keyak, JH, Stover, SM, Taylor, KT and Kaneps, AJ (1994). Estimation of material properties in the equine metacarpus with use of quantitative computed tomography. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 12(6): 822–833.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Davies, HM (2001). Relationships between third metacarpal bone parameters and surface strains. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 33: 16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Davies, HM, McCarthy, RN and Jeffcott, LB (1993). Surface strain on the dorsal metacarpus of thoroughbreds at different speeds and gaits. Acta Anatomica 146(2–3), 148–153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Riggs, CM (2002). Fractures – a preventable hazard of racing Thoroughbreds? Veterinary Journal 163(1): 19–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10Griffiths, JB, Steel, CM, Symons, PJ and Yovich, JV (2000). Improving the predictability of performance by pre-race detection of dorsal metacarpal disease in Thoroughbred racehorses. Australian Veterinary Journal 78(7): 466–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Cohen, ND, Mundy, GD, Peloso, JG, Carey, VJ and Amend, NK (1999). Results of physical inspection before races and racerelated characteristics and their association with musculoskeletal injuries in Thoroughbreds during races. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 215(5): 654–661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12Mundy, GD (2000). Equine welfare – racing. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 216(8): 1243–1246.Google ScholarPubMed
13Nunamaker, NM (2002). Relationships of exercise regimen and racetrack surface to modelling/remodelling of the third metacarpal bone in two-year old Throughbred racehorses. Veterinary Comparative Orthopaedic Traumatology 15(4): 195–199.Google Scholar
14Nunamaker, DM, Butterweck, DM and Provost, MT (1989). Some geometric properties of the third metacarpal bone: a comparison between the Thoroughbred and Standardbred racehorse. Journal of Biomechanics 22(2): 129–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Boston, RC and Nunamaker, DM (2000). Gait and speed as exercise components of risk factors associated with onset of fatigue injury of the third metacarpal bone in 2-year old Thoroughbred racehorses. American Journal of Veterinary Research 61(6): 602–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Butler, JA, Colles, CM, Dyson, SJ, Kold, SE and Poulos, PW (1993). General principles. In: Butler, JA, et al. (eds) Clinical Radiology of the Horse. London: Blackwell Scientific, pp. 9–17.Google Scholar
17Foreman, JH, Kneller, SK, Twardock, AR, Chambers, MD and Inoue, OJ (2002). Forelimb skeletal scintigraphy responses in previously untrained Thoroughbreds undergoing initial treadmill training. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 34: 230–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Hoskinson, JJ, Tucker, RL, Lillich, J and Bertone, JJ (1997). Advanced diagnostic imaging modalities available at the referral center. Veterinary Clinics of North America. Equine Practice 13(3): 601–612.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Jeffcott, LB, Buckingham, RN, McCarthy, RN, Cleeland, JC and Scotti, E (1988). Non-invasive measurement of bone: a review of clinical and research applications in the horse. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 6: 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Riggs, CM and Boyde, A (1999). Effect of exercise on bone density in distal regions of the equine third metacarpal bone in 2-year old Thoroughbreds. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 30: 555–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21Lepage, OM, Carstanjen, B and Uebelhart, D (2001). Noninvasive assessment of equine bone: an update. Veterinary Journal 161(1): 10–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Price, JS, Jackson, BF, Gray, JA, Harris, PA, Wright, IM, Pfeiffer, DU, et al. (2001). Biochemical markers of bone metabolism in growing Thoroughbreds: a longitudinal study. Research in Veterinary Science 71(1): 37–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Knapp, KM, Blake, GM, Spector, TD and Fogelman, I (2001). Multisite quantitative ultrasound: precision, age- and menopause-related changes, fracture discrimination, and T-score equivalence with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporosis International 12(6): 456–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24Knapp, KM, Blake, GM, Fogelman, I, Doyle, DV and Spector, TD (2002). Multisite quantitative ultrasound: Colles' fracture discrimination in postmenopausal women. Osteoporosis International 13(6): 474–479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25Sievanen, H, Cheng, S, Ollikainen, S and Uusi-Rasi, K (2001). Ultrasound velocity and cortical bone characteristics in vivo. Osteoporosis International 12(5): 399–405.Google ScholarPubMed
26Njeh, CF, Fuerst, T, Diessel, E and Genant, HK (2001). Is quantitative ultrasound dependent on bone structure? A reflection. Osteoporosis International 12(1): 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27Pratt, QW (1980). An in vivo method of ultrasonically evaluating bone strength. Proceedings of the American Association of Equine Practitioners 26: 295–301.Google Scholar
28Jeffcott, LB and McCarthy, RN (1985). Ultrasound as a tool for assessment of bone quality in the horse. Veterinary Record 116(13), 337–342.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29McCarthy, RN and Jeffcott, LB (1988). Ultrasonic transmission velocity and single photon absorptiometric measurement of metacarpal bone strength: an in vitro study in the horse. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 6: 80–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30Carstanjen, B, Lepage, OM, Detilleux, J, Duboeuf, F and Amory, H. (2002). Uses of multi-site quantitative ultrasonography for non-invasive assessment of bone in horses. American Journal of Veterinary Research 63(10), 1464–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Barkmann, R, Kantorovich, E, Singal, C, Hans, D, Genant, HK, Heller, M, et al. (2000). A new method for quantitative ultrasound measurements at multiple skeletal sites: first results of precision and fracture discrimination. Journal of Clinical Densitometry 3(1): 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32Lee, SC, Coan, BS and Bouxsein, ML (1997). Tibial ultrasound velocity measured in situ predicts the material properties of tibial cortical bone. Bone 21(1): 119–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33Hans, D, Genton, L, Allaoua, S, Pichard, C and Slosman, D (2003). Hip fracture discrimination study: QUS of the radius and the calcaneum. Journal of Clinical Densitometry 6(2): 163–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34Pearce, SG, Hurtig, M, Runciman, J and Dickey, J (2000). The effect of age, anatomic site and soft tissue on quantitative ultrasound. Journal of Veterinary Medicine A 16 (Suppl. 1), 469.Google Scholar
35Carstanjen, B, Duboeuf, F, Detilleux, J and Lepage, OM (2003). Equine third metacarpal bone assessment by quantitative ultrasound and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: an ex vivo study (2003). Journal of the Veterinary Medical Association of Physiology, Pathology and Clinical Medicine 50(1): 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36Davies, HM (2002). Dorsal metacarpal cortex ultrasound speed and bone size and shape. Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement 34: 337–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37Pithioux, M, Lasaygues, P and Chabrand, P (2002). An alternative ultrasonic method for measuring the elastic properties of cortical bone. Journal of Biomechanics 35(7): 961–968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38Weiss, M, Ben-Shlomo, AB, Hagag, P and Rapoport, M (2000). Reference database for bone speed-of-sound measurement by a novel quantitative multi-site ultrasound device. Osteoporosis International 11(8): 688–696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39Weiss, M, Ben-Shlomo, A, Hagag, P and Ish-Shalom, S (2000). Discrimination of proximal hip fracture by quantitative ultrasound measurement at the radius. Osteoporosis International 11(5): 411–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40Boutros, CP, Trout, DM, Kasra, M and Grynpas, MD (2000). The effect of repeated freeze-thaw cycles on the biomechancial properties of canine cortical bone. Veterinary Comparative Orthopaedic Traumatology 13(2): 59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41Biewener, AA, Thomason, J, Goodship, A and Lanyon, LE (1983). Bone stress in the horse forelimb during locomotion at different gaits: a comparison of two experimental methods. Journal of Biomechanics 16(8): 565–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42Dickey, JP, Holiday, J, Hurtig, M and Gawron, S (2001). Assessment of tibial speed-of-sound measurement in cross-country runners. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 15 (Suppl. 1), 496.Google Scholar