FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Relationship between CT-Derived Bone Mineral Density and UTE...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(17); 2780; doi: 10.3390/ani13172780

Relationship between CT-Derived Bone Mineral Density and UTE-MR-Derived Porosity Index in Equine Third Metacarpal and Metatarsal Bones.

Abstract: Fatigue-related subchondral bone injuries of the third metacarpal/metatarsal (McIII/MtIII) bones are common causes of wastage, and they are welfare concerns in racehorses. A better understanding of bone health and strength would improve animal welfare and be of benefit for the racing industry. The porosity index (PI) is an indirect measure of osseous pore size and number in bones, and it is therefore an interesting indicator of bone strength. MRI of compact bone using traditional methods, even with short echo times, fail to generate enough signal to assess bone architecture as water protons are tightly bound. Ultra-short echo time (UTE) sequences aim to increase the amount of signal detected in equine McIII/MtIII condyles. Cadaver specimens were imaged using a novel dual-echo UTE MRI technique, and PI was calculated and validated against quantitative CT-derived bone mineral density (BMD) measures. BMD and PI are inversely correlated in equine distal Mc/MtIII bone, with a weak mean r value of -0.29. There is a statistically significant difference in r values between the forelimbs and hindlimbs. Further work is needed to assess how correlation patterns behave in different areas of bone and to evaluate PI in horses with and without clinically relevant stress injuries.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-08-31 PubMed ID: 37685045PubMed Central: PMC10487176DOI: 10.3390/ani13172780Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The researchers in this study are examining the relationship between bone mineral density (BMD) and porosity index (PI) in horse bones. They found an inverse correlation between BMD and PI in specific areas of the bones and identified a difference in this relationship between the forelimbs and hindlimbs.

Understanding the Methodology and Findings

  • In exploring fatigue-related bone injuries that are common in racehorses, the researchers identified the need for a better understanding of bone health and strength.
  • They focused on the porosity index (PI), a measurement related to the size and number of pores in bones. This value can serve as an indirect indicator of bone strength.
  • In their study, traditional methods for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of compact bone didn’t provide enough signal to assess bone structure because the water protons in bone are tightly bound.
  • They turned instead to ultra-short echo time (UTE) sequences, which are designed to increase signal detection — in this case, in the metacarpal and metatarsal bones (the long bones in a horse’s legs).
  • By applying a dual-echo UTE MRI technique to image cadaver specimens and calculating PI, the researchers were able to validate their findings against quantitative CT-derived BMD measures.
  • Their results indicated an inverse relationship between BMD and PI in the distal (lower) portions of the metacarpal/metatarsal bones, which means that as BMD goes up, PI goes down (and vice versa).
  • However, this correlation was weak overall, with a mean r value (a measure of correlation) of -0.29.
  • Importantly, they also discovered a statistically significant difference in these r values between forelimbs and hindlimbs.

Implications of the Study and Further Research

  • The weak inverse relationship between BMD and PI could have significant implications for improving animal welfare, particularly among racehorses.
  • This study’s findings could potentially be used to develop preventative measures to reduce bone fatigue injuries in these animals.
  • Given the difference in r values between forelimbs and hindlimbs, it’s possible that different areas of the bones react differently to stress and require unique approaches to injury prevention.
  • However, the researchers note that more analysis is needed. Specifically, they recommend further exploring how the correlation patterns between BMD and PI vary across different bone areas.
  • It’s also necessary to evaluate PI in horses with and without clinical stress injuries to better understand how PI might serve as an indicator of these conditions.

Cite This Article

APA
Daniel CR, Taylor SE, McPhee S, Wolfram U, Schwarz T, Sommer S, Kershaw LE. (2023). Relationship between CT-Derived Bone Mineral Density and UTE-MR-Derived Porosity Index in Equine Third Metacarpal and Metatarsal Bones. Animals (Basel), 13(17), 2780. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13172780

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 17
PII: 2780

Researcher Affiliations

Daniel, Carola Riccarda
  • Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH25 9RG, UK.
Taylor, Sarah Elizabeth
  • Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH25 9RG, UK.
McPhee, Samuel
  • Institute of Mechanical, Process and Energy Engineering, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK.
Wolfram, Uwe
  • Institute of Mechanical, Process and Energy Engineering, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK.
Schwarz, Tobias
  • Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, The Roslin Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH25 9RG, UK.
Sommer, Stefan
  • Siemens Healthcare, 8047 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Swiss Center for Musculoskeletal Imaging (SCMI), Balgrist Campus, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Advanced Clinical Imaging Technology (ACIT), Siemens Healthcare AG, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Kershaw, Lucy E
  • Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences and Edinburgh Imaging, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH16 4TJ, UK.

Grant Funding

  • VET/CS/028 / Horserace Betting Levy Board
  • IPA 42 / Siemens Healthcare Ltd

Conflict of Interest Statement

S.S. is employed by Siemens Healthineers. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

This article includes 64 references
  1. Barr ED, Pinchbeck GL, Clegg PD, Boyde A, Riggs CM. Post mortem evaluation of palmar osteochondral disease (traumatic osteochondrosis) of the metacarpo/metatarsophalangeal joint in Thoroughbred racehorses. Equine Veter J 2009;41:366–371.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409X368372pubmed: 19562898google scholar: lookup
  2. Parkin T, Clegg P, French N, Proudman C, Riggs C, Singer E, Webbon P, Morgan K. Catastrophic fracture of the lateral condyle of the third metacarpus/metatarsus in UK racehorses—Fracture descriptions and pre-existing pathology. Veter J 2006;171:157–165.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2004.10.009pubmed: 16427592google scholar: lookup
  3. Pinchbeck G, Clegg P, Boyde A, Riggs C. Pathological and clinical features associated with palmar/plantar osteochondral disease of the metacarpo/metatarsophalangeal joint in Thoroughbred racehorses. Equine Vet J 2013;45:587–592.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12036pubmed: 23418959google scholar: lookup
  4. Pinchbeck G, Clegg P, Boyde A, Barr E, Riggs C. Horse-, training-and race-level risk factors for palmar/plantar osteochondral disease in the racing Thoroughbred. Equine Vet J 2013;45:582–586.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12038pmc: PMC3883097pubmed: 23425384google scholar: lookup
  5. Arthur RM. The North American Thoroughbred. In: Ross MW, Dyson SJ, editors. Diagnosis and Management of Lameness in the Horse. 2nd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2010. pp. 977–993.
  6. Pilsworth RC. The European Thoroughbred. In: Ross MW, Dyson SJ, editors. Diagnosis and Management of Lameness in the Horse. 2nd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: 2010. pp. 994–1013.
  7. Davis AM, Fan X, Shen L, Robinson P, Riggs CM. Improved radiological diagnosis of palmar osteochondral disease in the Thoroughbred racehorse. Equine Veter J 2017;49:454–460.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12636pubmed: 27566990google scholar: lookup
  8. Sherlock CE, Mair TS, TER Braake F. Osseous lesions in the metacarpo(tarso)phalangeal joint diagnosed using low-field magnetic resonance imaging in standing horses. Veter Radiol Ultrasound 2009;50:13–20.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2008.01484.xpubmed: 19241749google scholar: lookup
  9. Murray RC, Branch MV, Tranquille C, Woods S. Validation of magnetic resonance imaging for measurement of equine articular cartilage and subchondral bone thickness. Am J Veter Res 2005;66:1999–2005.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1999pubmed: 16334962google scholar: lookup
  10. Riggs CM, Whitehouse GH, Boyde A. Pathology of the distal condyles of the third metacarpal and third metatarsal bones of the horse. Equine Veter J 1999;31:140–148.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03807.xpubmed: 10213426google scholar: lookup
  11. Muir P, Peterson AL, Sample SJ, Scollay MC, Markel MD, Kalscheur VL. Exercise-induced metacarpophalangeal joint adaptation in the Thoroughbred racehorse. J Anat 2008;213:706–717.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2008.00996.xpmc: PMC2666139pubmed: 19094186google scholar: lookup
  12. Allen SE, Rosanowski SM, Stirk AJ, Verheyen KLP. Description of veterinary events and risk factors for fatality in National Hunt flat racing Thoroughbreds in Great Britain (2000–2013). Equine Veter J 2017;49:700–705.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12676pubmed: 28235142google scholar: lookup
  13. Parkin TDH, French NP, Riggs CM, Morgan KL, Clegg PD, Proudman CJ, Singer ER, Webbon PM, Bsc BTDHP, Bvsc MNPF. Risk of fatal distal limb fractures among thoroughbreds involved in the five tpes of racing in the United Kingdom. Veter Rec 2004;154:493–497.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.154.16.493pubmed: 15130054google scholar: lookup
  14. Zekas LJ, Bramlage LR, Embertson RM, Hance SR. Characterisation of the type and location of fractures of the third metacarpal/metatarsal condyles in 135 horses in central Kentucky (1986–1994). Equine Veter J 1999;31:304–308.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03821.xpubmed: 10454088google scholar: lookup
  15. Datir A, Saini A, Connell D, Saifuddin A. Stress-related bone injuries with emphasis on MRI. Clin Radiol 2007;62:828–836.
    doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2007.02.018pubmed: 17662729google scholar: lookup
  16. Wentz L, Liu PY, Haymes E, Ilich JZ. Females Have a Greater Incidence of Stress Fractures than Males in Both Military and Athletic Populations: A Systemic Review. Mil Med 2011;176:420–430.
    doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-10-00322pubmed: 21539165google scholar: lookup
  17. Whitton RC, Ayodele BA, Hitchens PL, Mackie EJ. Subchondral bone microdamage accumulation in distal metacarpus of Thoroughbred racehorses. Equine Veter J 2018;50:766–773.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12948pubmed: 29660153google scholar: lookup
  18. Gupta H, Zioupos P. Fracture of bone tissue: The ‘hows’ and the ‘whys’. Med Eng Phys 2008;30:1209–1226.
    doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.09.007pubmed: 18977164google scholar: lookup
  19. Verheyen K, Price J, Lanyon L, Wood J. Exercise distance and speed affect the risk of fracture in racehorses. Bone 2006;39:1322–1330.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2006.05.025pubmed: 16926125google scholar: lookup
  20. Chapurlat RD, Delmas PD. Bone microdamage: A clinical perspective. Osteoporos Int 2009;20:1299–1308.
    doi: 10.1007/s00198-009-0899-9pubmed: 19291343google scholar: lookup
  21. Powell SE, Ramzan PHL, Head MJ, Shepherd MC, Baldwin GI, Steven WN. Standing magnetic resonance imaging detection of bone marrow oedema-type signal pattern associated with subcarpal pain in 8 racehorses: A prospective study. Equine Veter J 2010;42:10–17.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409X471467pubmed: 20121907google scholar: lookup
  22. Gaeta M, Minutoli F, Scribano E, Ascenti G, Vinci S, Bruschetta D, Magaudda L, Blandino A. CT and MR Imaging Findings in Athletes with Early Tibial Stress Injuries: Comparison with Bone Scintigraphy Findings and Emphasis on Cortical Abnormalities. Radiology 2005;235:553–561.
    doi: 10.1148/radiol.2352040406pubmed: 15858094google scholar: lookup
  23. Deutsch AL, Coel MN, Mink JH. IMAGING OF STRESS INJURIES TO BONE: Radiography, Scintigraphy, and MR Imaging. Clin Sports Med 1997;16:275–290.
    doi: 10.1016/S0278-5919(05)70022-3pubmed: 9238310google scholar: lookup
  24. Hodler J, Steinert H, Zanetti M, Frölicher U, Rogala J, Stumpe K, Von Schulthess GK. Radiographically negative stress-related bone injury: MR imaging versus two-phase bone scintigraphy. Acta Radiol 1998;39:416–420.
    doi: 10.1080/02841859809172456pubmed: 9685830google scholar: lookup
  25. Bates DW, Black DM, Cummings SR. Clinical use of bone densitometry: Clinical applications. JAMA 2002;288:1898–1900.
    doi: 10.1001/jama.288.15.1898pubmed: 12377089google scholar: lookup
  26. Adams AL, Fischer H, Kopperdahl DL, Lee DC, Black DM, Bouxsein ML, Fatemi S, Khosla S, Orwoll ES, Siris ES. Osteoporosis and Hip Fracture Risk from Routine Computed Tomography Scans: The Fracture, Osteoporosis, and CT Utilization Study (FOCUS). J Bone Miner Res 2018;33:1291–1301.
    doi: 10.1002/jbmr.3423pmc: PMC6155990pubmed: 29665068google scholar: lookup
  27. Bogers SH, Rogers CW, Bolwell C, Roe W, Gee E, McIlwraith CW. Quantitative comparison of bone mineral density characteristics of the distal epiphysis of third metacarpal bones from Thoroughbred racehorses with or without condylar fracture. Am J Veter Res 2017;77:32–38.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.77.1.32pubmed: 26709934google scholar: lookup
  28. Firth EC, Rogers CW, van Weeren PR, Barneveld A, McIlwraith CW, Kawcak CE, Goodship AE, Smith RK. The effect of previous conditioning exercise on diaphyseal and metaphyseal bone to imposition and withdrawal of training in young Thoroughbred horses. Veter J 2012;192:34–40.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.05.016pubmed: 21855374google scholar: lookup
  29. Loughridge AB, Hess AM, Parkin TD, Kawcak CE. Qualitative assessment of bone density at the distal articulating surface of the third metacarpal in Thoroughbred racehorses with and without condylar fracture. Equine Veter J 2017;49:172–177.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12544pubmed: 26638772google scholar: lookup
  30. Iori G, Schneider J, Reisinger A, Heyer F, Peralta L, Wyers C, Raum K. Large cortical bone pores in the tibia are associated with proximal femur strength. PLoS ONE 2019;14:e0215405.
    pmc: PMC6469812pubmed: 30995279
  31. Musy SN, Maquer G, Panyasantisuk J, Wandel J, Zysset PK. Not only stiffness, but also yield strength of the trabecular structure determined by non-linear µFE is best predicted by bone volume fraction and fabric tensor. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2017;65:808–813.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.10.004pubmed: 27788473google scholar: lookup
  32. Zebaze R, Atkinson EJ, Peng Y, Bui M, Ghasem-Zadeh A, Khosla S, Seeman E. Increased cortical porosity and reduced trabecular density are not necessarily synonymous with bone loss and microstructural deterioration. JBMR Plus 2019;3:e10078.
    doi: 10.1002/jbm4.10078pmc: PMC6478579pubmed: 31044180google scholar: lookup
  33. Kral R, Osima M, Vestgaard R, Richardsen E, Bjørnerem Å. Women with fracture, unidentified by FRAX, but identified by cortical porosity, have a set of characteristics that contribute to their increased fracture risk beyond high FRAX score and high cortical porosity. Bone 2018;116:259–265.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2018.08.018pubmed: 30153509google scholar: lookup
  34. Jerban S, Ma Y, Alenezi S, Moazamian D, Athertya J, Jang H, Dorthe E, Dlima D, Woods G, Chung CB. Ultrashort Echo Time (UTE) MRI porosity index (PI) and suppression ratio (SR) correlate with the cortical bone microstructural and mechanical properties: Ex vivo study. Bone 2023;169:116676.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2023.116676pmc: PMC9987215pubmed: 36657630google scholar: lookup
  35. Du J, Bydder GM. Qualitative and quantitative ultrashort-TE MRI of cortical bone. NMR Biomed 2013;26:489–506.
    doi: 10.1002/nbm.2906pmc: PMC4206448pubmed: 23280581google scholar: lookup
  36. Techawiboonwong A, Song HK, Leonard MB, Wehrli FW. Faculty Opinions recommendation of Cortical bone water: In vivo quantification with ultrashort echo-time MR imaging. Radiology 2008;248:824–833.
    doi: 10.1148/radiol.2482071995pmc: PMC2798093pubmed: 18632530google scholar: lookup
  37. Ma YJ, Jerban S, Jang H, Chang D, Chang EY, Du J. Quantitative Ultrashort Echo Time (UTE) Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Bone: An Update. Front Endocrinol 2020;11:567417.
    doi: 10.3389/fendo.2020.567417pmc: PMC7531487pubmed: 33071975google scholar: lookup
  38. Jones BC, Jia S, Lee H, Feng A, Shetye SS, Batzdorf A, Shapira N, Noël PB, Pleshko N, Rajapakse CS. MRI-derived porosity index is associated with whole-bone stiffness and mineral density in human cadaveric femora. Bone 2021;143:115774.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115774pmc: PMC7769997pubmed: 33271401google scholar: lookup
  39. Manhard MK, Uppuganti S, Granke M, Gochberg DF, Nyman JS, Does MD. MRI-derived bound and pore water concentrations as predictors of fracture resistance. Bone 2016;87:1–10.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2016.03.007pmc: PMC4862893pubmed: 26993059google scholar: lookup
  40. Rajapakse CS, Bashoor-Zadeh M, Li C, Sun W, Wright AC, Wehrli FW. Volumetric cortical bone porosity assessment with MR imaging: Validation and clinical feasibility. Radiology 2015;276:526–535.
    doi: 10.1148/radiol.15141850pmc: PMC4517853pubmed: 26203710google scholar: lookup
  41. Chang EY, Bae WC, Shao H, Biswas R, Li S, Chen J, Patil S, Healey R, D’Lima DD, Chung CB. Ultrashort echo time magnetization transfer (UTE-MT) imaging of cortical bone. NMR Biomed 2015;28:873–880.
    doi: 10.1002/nbm.3316pmc: PMC4652942pubmed: 25981914google scholar: lookup
  42. McPhee S, Kershaw LE, Daniel CR, Fernández MP, Cillán-García E, Taylor SE, Wolfram U. QCT-based computational bone strength assessment updated with MRI-derived ‘hidden’ microporosity. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2023:106094.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2023.106094google scholar: lookup
  43. Abràmoff MD, Magalhães PJ, Ram SJ. Image processing with ImageJ. Biophotonics Int 2004;11:36–42.
  44. Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K, Viergever MA, Pluim JPW. elastix: A Toolbox for Intensity-Based Medical Image Registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009;29:196–205.
    doi: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2035616pubmed: 19923044google scholar: lookup
  45. Shamonin DP, Bron EE, Lelieveldt BP, Smits M, Klein S, Staring M, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Fast parallel image registration on CPU and GPU for diagnostic classification of Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neuroinformatics 2014;7:50.
    doi: 10.3389/fninf.2013.00050pmc: PMC3893567pubmed: 24474917google scholar: lookup
  46. Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, Bauer C, Jennings D, Fennessy F, Sonka M. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:1323–1341.
    doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001pmc: PMC3466397pubmed: 22770690google scholar: lookup
  47. BPG Ltd. Correlation and Regression: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2023. [(accessed on 28 August 2023)]. Available online: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-readers/publications/statistics-square-one/11-correlation-and-regression.
  48. Borreguero J, Galve F, Algarín JM, Benlloch JM, Alonso J. Low field slice-selective ZTE imaging of ultra-short $$T_2$$ tissues based on spin-locking. Sci Rep 2023;13:1662.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-28640-xpmc: PMC9886919pubmed: 36717649google scholar: lookup
  49. Chen X, Qiu B. A pilot study of short T2* measurements with ultrashort echo time imaging at 0.35 T. Biomed Eng Online 2018;17:1–8.
    doi: 10.1186/s12938-018-0505-5pmc: PMC5987637pubmed: 29866123google scholar: lookup
  50. Seifert AC, Wehrli FW. Solid-State Quantitative (1)H and (31)P MRI of Cortical Bone in Humans. Curr Osteoporos Rep 2016;14:77–86.
    doi: 10.1007/s11914-016-0307-2pmc: PMC4860104pubmed: 27048472google scholar: lookup
  51. Jerban S, Ma Y, Wong JH, Nazaran A, Searleman A, Wan L, Williams J, Du J, Chang EY. Ultrashort echo time magnetic resonance imaging (UTE-MRI) of cortical bone correlates well with histomorphometric assessment of bone microstructure. Bone 2019;123:8–17.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2019.03.013pmc: PMC6504977pubmed: 30877070google scholar: lookup
  52. Boyde A. The real response of bone to exercise. J Anat 2003;203:173–189.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1469-7580.2003.00213.xpmc: PMC1571152pubmed: 12924818google scholar: lookup
  53. Hillier ML, Bell LS. Differentiating Human Bone from Animal Bone: A Review of Histological Methods. J Forensic Sci 2007;52:249–263.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00368.xpubmed: 17316219google scholar: lookup
  54. van der Made AD, Maas M, Beenen LFM, Oostra RJ, Kerkhoffs GMMJ. Postmortem imaging exposed: An aid in MR imaging of musculoskeletal structures. Skelet Radiol 2013;42:467–472.
    doi: 10.1007/s00256-012-1515-1pubmed: 22976477google scholar: lookup
  55. Bolen GE, Haye D, Dondelinger RF, Massart L, Busoni V. Impact of successive freezing-thawing cycles on 3-T magnetic resonance images of the digits of isolated equine limbs. Am J Veter Res 2011;72:780–790.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.72.6.780pubmed: 21627524google scholar: lookup
  56. Johnston GC, Ahern BJ, Woldeyohannes SM, Young AC. Does the low-field MRI appearance of intraosseous STIR hyperintensity in equine cadaver limbs change when subjected to a freeze-thaw process?. Animals 2021;11:475.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11020475pmc: PMC7916973pubmed: 33670209google scholar: lookup
  57. Chen M, Yuan H. Assessment of porosity index of the femoral neck and tibia by 3D ultra-short echo-time MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018;47:820–828.
    doi: 10.1002/jmri.25782pubmed: 28561910google scholar: lookup
  58. Cooper D, Kawalilak C, Harrison K, Johnston B, Johnston J. Cortical bone porosity: What is it, why is it important, and how can we detect it?. Curr Osteoporos Rep 2016;14:187–198.
    doi: 10.1007/s11914-016-0319-ypubmed: 27623679google scholar: lookup
  59. Ott SM. Cortical or trabecular bone: What’s the difference?. Am J Nephrol 2018;47:373–375.
    doi: 10.1159/000489672pubmed: 29788030google scholar: lookup
  60. Renders GAP, Mulder L, van Ruijven LJ, van Eijden TMGJ. Porosity of human mandibular condylar bone. J Anat 2007;210:239–248.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2007.00693.xpmc: PMC2100285pubmed: 17331174google scholar: lookup
  61. Liley H, Zhang J, Firth EC, Fernandez JW, Besier TF. Statistical modeling of the equine third metacarpal bone incorporating morphology and bone mineral density. PLoS ONE 2018;13:e0194406.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194406pmc: PMC5991359pubmed: 29874224google scholar: lookup
  62. Currey J. Changes in the impact energy absorption of bone with age. J Biomech 1979;12:459–469.
    doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(79)90031-9pubmed: 457700google scholar: lookup
  63. Diab T, Sit S, Kim D, Rho J, Vashishth D. Age-dependent fatigue behaviour of human cortical bone. Eur J Morphol 2005;42:53–59.
    doi: 10.1080/09243860500095539pubmed: 16123024google scholar: lookup
  64. Bjørnerem Å. The clinical contribution of cortical porosity to fragility fractures. BoneKEy Rep 2016;5:846.
    doi: 10.1038/bonekey.2016.77pmc: PMC5081000pubmed: 27818743google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.