» Articles » PMID: 38090470

The Application of Advanced Bone Imaging Technologies in Sports Medicine

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Radiology
Date 2023 Dec 13
PMID 38090470
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Until recently, the evaluation of bone health and fracture risk through imaging has been limited to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and plain radiographs, with a limited application in the athletic population. Several novel imaging technologies are now available for the clinical assessment of bone health, including bone injury risk and healing progression, with a potential for use in sports medicine. Among these imaging modalities is high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) which is a promising technology that has been developed to examine the bone microarchitecture in both cortical and trabecular bone at peripheral anatomical sites. Technologies that do not expose patients to ionizing radiation are optimal, particularly for athletes who may require frequent imaging. One such alternative is diagnostic ultrasound, which is preferable due to its low cost and lack of radiation exposure. Furthermore, ultrasound, which has not been a common imaging modality for monitoring fracture healing, has been shown to potentially demonstrate earlier signs of union compared to conventional radiographs, including callus mineralization and density at the healing site. Through the use of conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), finite element analysis (FEA) can be used to simulate the structural and mechanical properties of bone. On the other hand, the ultrashort echo time (UTE) MRI can evaluate cortical bone quality by detecting water bound to the organic bone matrix and free water, providing important information about bone porosity. Several novel bone imaging techniques originally developed for osteoporosis assessment have great potential to be utilized to improve the standard of care in bone fracture risk assessment and healing in sports medicine with much greater precision and less adverse radiation exposure.

References
1.
Hoffman D, Adams E, Bianchi S . Ultrasonography of fractures in sports medicine. Br J Sports Med. 2014; 49(3):152-60. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-094217. View

2.
Langton C, Pisharody S, Keyak J . Comparison of 3D finite element analysis derived stiffness and BMD to determine the failure load of the excised proximal femur. Med Eng Phys. 2009; 31(6):668-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.12.007. View

3.
Rajapakse C, Hotca A, Newman B, Ramme A, Vira S, Kobe E . Patient-specific Hip Fracture Strength Assessment with Microstructural MR Imaging-based Finite Element Modeling. Radiology. 2016; 283(3):854-861. PMC: 5452878. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016160874. View

4.
Li L, Yang L, Zhang K, Zhu L, Wang X, Jiang Q . Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of aggravating medial meniscus tears on knee osteoarthritis. J Orthop Translat. 2020; 20:47-55. PMC: 6939112. DOI: 10.1016/j.jot.2019.06.007. View

5.
Ciarelli M, Goldstein S, Kuhn J, Cody D, Brown M . Evaluation of orthogonal mechanical properties and density of human trabecular bone from the major metaphyseal regions with materials testing and computed tomography. J Orthop Res. 1991; 9(5):674-82. DOI: 10.1002/jor.1100090507. View