medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Acta Ortopédica Mexicana

ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2004, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2004; 18 (1)

Usefulness of osseous densitometry in controlling the consolidation of the evolution of lumbar spine fractures

Dufoo OM, García LO, López PJ, Carranco G, García TJL, Hernández RLA
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 16-17
PDF size: 30.34 Kb.


Key words:

spine lumbar, fracture, densitometry..

ABSTRACT

Objective: To test the usefulness of osseous densitometry in controlling the consolidation of the evolution of lumbar spine fractures. Material and methods: Seventeen patients presenting lumbar spine fracture were studied. They ranged from 18 to 52 years old, 9 from the male sex and 8 from the female sex; 35% of them suffered from a L1 fracture, 41% from a L3 fracture, 12% with L3 fracture, and 6 % with L4 fracture. They were practiced a osseous densitometry in a week and eight weeks ahead. Results: During the first eight days from the lesion, an initial osseous densitometry was performed, which indicated a + 0.06 mean of Standard deviation, with no significant difference. The average standard deviation (ASD) was of ± 0.12. Discussion: Osseous densitometry was irrelevant in the study on controlling the evolution of lumbar spine fracture consolidation.


REFERENCES

  1. Bauer DC, Gluer CC, Cavley JA, Vogt TM, Ensrud KE, Genant HK, Black DM: Broadband ultrasound attenuation predicts fractures strongly and independently of densitometry in older women. A prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157(6): 629-634.

  2. Fitting DW, Adler L: Ultrasonic Spectral Analysis for nondestructive evaluation, New York, Plenum, 1981.

  3. Heaney RP, Kanis JA: The interpretation and utility of ultrasound measurements of bone. Bone 1996; 18(6): 491-492.

  4. Müller R, Hildebrand T, Rüegsegger P: Non-invasive bone biopsy: a new method to analyze and display the three-dimensional structure of trabecular bone. Phys Med Biol 1994; 39(1): 145-164.

  5. Nicholson PH, Haddaway MJ, Davie MW: Dependence of ultrasonic properties on orientation in human vertebral bone. Phys Med Biol 1994; 39: 1013-1024.

  6. Rho JY, Ashman RB, Turner CH: Young’s modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material: ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech 1993; 26(2): 111-119.

  7. Rüegsegger P, Koller B, Müller R: A microtomographic system for the non-destructive evaluation of bone architecture. Calcif Tissue Int 1996; 58(1): 24-29.

  8. Strelizki R, Evans JA: An investigation of the measurement of broadband ultrasonic attenuation in trabecular bone. Ultrasonics 1996; 34(8): 785-791.

  9. Williams JL: Ultrasonic wave propagation in cancellous and cortical bone: prediction of some experimental results by Biot’s theory. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 91(2): 1106-1112.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Acta Ortop Mex. 2004 Ene-Feb;18