TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimating human long bone cross-sectional geometric properties
T2 - A comparison of noninvasive methods
AU - O'Neill, Matthew C.
AU - Ruff, Christopher B.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. We thank Dr. J. Stock for kindly lending us his canine tibiae data, Dr. J. Ohman for a copy of his program GEOXRAY and discussions regarding its implementation, and three anonymous reviewers whose comments improved the quality of the manuscript.
Copyright:
Copyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2004/10
Y1 - 2004/10
N2 - Cross-sectional properties (areas, second moments of area) have been used extensively for reconstructing the mechanical loading history of long bone shafts. In the absence of a fortuitous break or available computed tomography (CT) facilities, the endosteal and/or periosteal boundaries of a bone may be approximated using alternative noninvasive methods. The present study tests whether cross-sectional geometric properties of human lower limb bones can be adequately estimated using two such techniques: the ellipse model method (EMM), which uses biplanar radiography alone, and the latex cast method (LCM), which involves molding of the subperiosteal contour in combination with biplanar radiography to estimate the contour of the medullary canal. Results of both methods are compared with "true" cross-sectional properties calculated by direct sectioning. The study sample includes matched femora and tibiae of 50 Pecos Pueblo Amerindians. Bone areas and second moments of area were calculated for the midshaft femur and tibia and proximal femoral diaphysis in each individual. Percent differences between methods were derived to evaluate directional (systematic) and absolute (random) error. Multiple regression was also used to investigate the sources of error associated with each method. The results indicate that while the LCM shows generally good correspondence to the true cross-sectional properties, the EMM generally overestimates true parameters. Regression equations are provided to correct this overestimation, and, when applied to another sample, are shown to significantly improve estimates for the femoral midshaft, although corrections are less successful for the other section locations. Our results suggest that the LCM is an adequate substitute for estimating cross-sectional properties when direct sectioning and CT are not feasible. The EMM is a reasonable alternative, although the bias inherent in the method should be corrected if possible, especially when the results of the study are to be compared with data collected using different methods.
AB - Cross-sectional properties (areas, second moments of area) have been used extensively for reconstructing the mechanical loading history of long bone shafts. In the absence of a fortuitous break or available computed tomography (CT) facilities, the endosteal and/or periosteal boundaries of a bone may be approximated using alternative noninvasive methods. The present study tests whether cross-sectional geometric properties of human lower limb bones can be adequately estimated using two such techniques: the ellipse model method (EMM), which uses biplanar radiography alone, and the latex cast method (LCM), which involves molding of the subperiosteal contour in combination with biplanar radiography to estimate the contour of the medullary canal. Results of both methods are compared with "true" cross-sectional properties calculated by direct sectioning. The study sample includes matched femora and tibiae of 50 Pecos Pueblo Amerindians. Bone areas and second moments of area were calculated for the midshaft femur and tibia and proximal femoral diaphysis in each individual. Percent differences between methods were derived to evaluate directional (systematic) and absolute (random) error. Multiple regression was also used to investigate the sources of error associated with each method. The results indicate that while the LCM shows generally good correspondence to the true cross-sectional properties, the EMM generally overestimates true parameters. Regression equations are provided to correct this overestimation, and, when applied to another sample, are shown to significantly improve estimates for the femoral midshaft, although corrections are less successful for the other section locations. Our results suggest that the LCM is an adequate substitute for estimating cross-sectional properties when direct sectioning and CT are not feasible. The EMM is a reasonable alternative, although the bias inherent in the method should be corrected if possible, especially when the results of the study are to be compared with data collected using different methods.
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Cross-sectional geometry
KW - Femur
KW - Human
KW - Tibia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=8844225685&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=8844225685&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.07.002
DO - 10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.07.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 15454334
AN - SCOPUS:8844225685
SN - 0047-2484
VL - 47
SP - 221
EP - 235
JO - Journal of Human Evolution
JF - Journal of Human Evolution
IS - 4
ER -