Microhardness distribution of subchondral cancellous bone in weight-bearing joints of the human lower extremity long bones
Wang Jianzhao, Zhang Xiaojuan, Yin Bing, Li Sheng, Liu Guobin, Chen Wei, Zhang Yingze
Emergency Center of Trauma, the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Key Laboratory of Biomechanics of Hebei Province, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
Abstract：Objective To explore the microhardness distribution of human subchondral cancellous bone in weight-bearing joints of lower extremity long bones. Methods The right femur and tibia were dissected from three fresh frozen Chinese cadavers older than 40 years. Then, 3 mm-thick cancellous bone samples were taken from the diaphyseal party on the femoral head, femoral medial condyle, femoral lateral condyle, tibial medial condyle, tibial lateral condyle, and distal tibia perpendicularly to the lower limb mechanical axis and 1 cm below the articular surface. The microhardness of subchondral cancellous bone was measured with a Vickers microhardness measurement system. The microhardness values of subchondral cancellous bone in different specimens, femur and tibia, and different anatomical sites were compared. The microhardness distribution of the subchondral cancellous bone in different anatomical locations of the three donors was analyzed. Results A total of 180 indentations were conducted on 18 specimens. The microhardness of the subchondral cancellous bone in the weight-bearing lower limb long bones of the three donors was 20.3–47.3 (36.0 ± 5.7) HV, and no statistically significant difference existed between the three donors (F=2.40, P=0.094). The microhardness of femoral subchondral cancellous bone was smaller than that of the tibia, with (32.5 ± 4.9) HV and (39.4 ± 4.3) HV, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (t=-10.02, P <0.001). Given the different anatomical sites, the microhardness values were as follows: subchondral cancellous bone of the femoral head (32.9 ± 4.6) HV; femoral medial condyle (35.1 ± 3.9) HV; femoral lateral condyle (29.7 ± 4.7) HV; tibial medial condyle (40.8 ± 4.0) HV; external tibial condyle (36.8 ± 4.2) HV; and distal tibial (40.7 ± 3.6) HV. The difference was statistically significant (F=33.28, P < 0.001), of which the microhardness of the external femoral condyle was the lowest, and the microhardness of the internal tibial condyle was the highest. The microhardness of the medial condyle was greater than that of the lateral condyle. The microhardness distributions of the subchondral bone in different anatomical sites of the three specimens were similar. Conclusion A significant difference is observed in the microhardness values of the subchondral bones in lower extremity long bones. The microhardness of subchondral bones in the tibia is higher than that of the femur; the microhardness of the medial compartment of the knee is greater than that of the lateral compartment.
王建朝, 张晓娟, 殷兵, 李升, 刘国彬, 陈伟, 张英泽. 人体下肢长骨负重关节软骨下松质骨显微硬度分布特征的研究[J]. 中华解剖与临床杂志, 2022, 27(2): 65-69.
Wang Jianzhao, Zhang Xiaojuan, Yin Bing, Li Sheng, Liu Guobin, Chen Wei, Zhang Yingze. Microhardness distribution of subchondral cancellous bone in weight-bearing joints of the human lower extremity long bones. Chinese Journal of Anatomy and Clinics, 2022, 27(2): 65-69.
Aho OM, Finnilä M, Thevenot J, et al.Subchondral bone histology and grading in osteoarthritis[J]. PLoS One, 2017,12(3):e0173726. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173726.
[2]
Madry H, van Dijk CN, Mueller-Gerbl M. The basic science of the subchondral bone[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2010,18(4):419-433. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-010-1054-z.
[3]
Castañeda S, Roman-Blas JA, Largo R, et al.Subchondral bone as a key target for osteoarthritis treatment[J]. Biochem Pharmacol, 2012,83(3):315-323. DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2011.09.018.
[4]
Li G, Yin J, Gao J, et al.Subchondral bone in osteoarthritis: insight into risk factors and microstructural changes[J]. Arthritis Res Ther, 2013,15(6):223. DOI: 10.1186/ar4405.
[5]
Funck-Brentano T, Cohen-Solal M.Subchondral bone and osteoarthritis[J]. Curr Opin Rheumatol, 2015,27(4):420-426. DOI: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000181.
[6]
Xu L, Hayashi D, Roemer FW, et al.Magnetic resonance imaging of subchondral bone marrow lesions in association with osteoarthritis[J]. Semin Arthritis Rheum, 2012,42(2):105-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2012.03.009.
[7]
Adebayo OO, Ko FC, Wan PT, et al.Role of subchondral bone properties and changes in development of load-induced osteoarthritis in mice[J]. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 2017,25(12): 2108-2118. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.08.016.
[8]
Muraoka T, Hagino H, Okano T, et al.Role of subchondral bone in osteoarthritis development: a comparative study of two strains of guinea pigs with and without spontaneously occurring osteoarthritis[J]. Arthritis Rheum, 2007, 56(10):3366-3374. DOI: 10.1002/art.22921.
[9]
Neogi T, Nevitt M, Niu J, et al.Subchondral bone attrition may be a reflection of compartment-specific mechanical load: the MOST Study[J]. Ann Rheum Dis, 2010,69(5):841-844. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2009.110114.
[10]
Goldring SR. Role of bone in osteoarthritis pathogenesis[J]. Med Clin North Am, 2009,93(1):25-35, xv. DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2008.09.006.
[11]
Sniekers YH, Intema F, Lafeber FP, et al.A role for subchondral bone changes in the process of osteoarthritis; a micro-CT study of two canine models[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2008, 9:20. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-9-20.
[12]
Tassani S, Ohman C, Baruffaldi F, et al.Volume to density relation in adult human bone tissue[J]. J Biomech, 2011,44(1):103-108. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.08.032.
[13]
Burnett WD, Kontulainen SA, McLennan CE, et al. Proximal tibial trabecular bone mineral density is related to pain in patients with osteoarthritis[J]. Arthritis Res Ther, 2017,19(1):200. DOI: 10.1186/s13075-017-1415-9.
[14]
Currey JD, Brear K.Hardness, young's modulus and yield stress in mammalian mineralized tissues[J]. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, 1990, 1(1):14-20. DOI: 10.1007/BF00705348.
[15]
殷兵, 王建朝, 李升, 等. 人体跖骨显微硬度的分布特征研究[J].中华解剖与临床杂志, 2018, 23(6):465-468. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-7041.2018.06.002.Yin B, Wang JC, Li S, et al.The micro-hardness distribution in human metatarsal bones[J]. Chin J Anat Clin, 2018, 23(6):465-468. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-7041.2018.06.002.
[16]
ASTM E384-17. Standard test method for microindentation hardness of materials[S]. West Conshohocken: ASTM International, 2017. DOI: 10.1520/E0384-17.
[17]
Ohman C, Zwierzak I, Baleani M, et al.Human bone hardness seems to depend on tissue type but not on anatomical site in the long bones of an old subject[J]. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 2013,227(2):200-206. DOI: 10.1177/0954411912459424.
[18]
李升, 张晓娟, 吴卫卫, 等. 人体脊柱胸腰段椎骨显微骨硬度分布特征研究[J].中华解剖与临床杂志, 2019, 24(4):313-317. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-7041.2019.04.001.Li S, Zhang XJ, Wu WW, et al.The hardness variations and characteristics of the human thoracolumbar segments by Vickers micro indentation[J]. Chin J Anat Clin, 2019, 24(4): 313-317. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-7041.2019.04.001.
[19]
Wang J, Yin B, Liu G, et al.Microhardness distribution of the tibial diaphysis and test site selection for reference point indentation technique[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2019,98(29):e16523. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016523.
[20]
Galante J, Rostoker W, Ray RD.Physical properties of trabecular bone[J]. Calcif Tissue Res, 1970,5(3):236-246. DOI: 10.1007/BF02017552.
[21]
Hodgskinson R, Currey JD, Evans GP.Hardness, an indicator of the mechanical competence of cancellous bone[J]. J Orthop Res, 1989, 7(5):754-758. DOI: 10.1002/jor.1100070518.
[22]
Li S, Wang JZ, Yin B, et al.Atlas of human skeleton hardness obtained using the micro-indentation technique[J]. Orthop Surg, 2021, DOI: 10.1111/os.12841.
[23]
Venäläinen MS, Mononen ME, Väänänen SP, et al.Effect of bone inhomogeneity on tibiofemoral contact mechanics during physiological loading[J]. J Biomech, 2016,49(7):1111-1120. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.02.033.
[24]
Jepsen KJ.Functional interactions among morphologic and tissue quality traits define bone quality[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2011, 469(8):2150-2159. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1706-9.
[25]
Morgan EF, Bayraktar HH, Keaveny TM.Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site[J]. J Biomech, 2003 36(7):897-904. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(03)00071-x.
[26]
Plochocki JH, Rivera JP, Zhang C, et al.Bone modeling response to voluntary exercise in the hindlimb of mice[J]. J Morphol, 2008, 269(3): 313-318. DOI: 10.1002/jmor.10587.
[27]
Follet H, Boivin G, Rumelhart C, et al.The degree of mineralization is a determinant of bone strength: a study on human calcanei[J]. Bone, 2004,34(5):783-789. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2003.12.012.
[28]
Wallace IJ, Tommasini SM, Judex S, et al.Genetic variations and physical activity as determinants of limb bone morphology: an experimental approach using a mouse model[J]. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2012,148(1):24-35. DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22028.
Pragnère S, Boulocher C, Pollet O, et al.Mechanical alterations of the bone-cartilage unit in a rabbit model of early osteoarthrosis[J]. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 2018,83:1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.03.033.
2022, Vol. 27 
