The differences in bone mineral density and proximal femoral geometry between middle-aged and young adult patients with different types of hip fractures

doi:10.11958/20260225

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To compare the differences of bone mineral density (BMD) and proximal femoral geometry between the different types of hip fractures. Methods A total of 132 patients with hip fractures aged 18 to 50 years were selected and divided into the intertrochanteric fracture (ITF) group (n=55) and the femoral neck fracture (FNF) group (n=77) according to different fracture sites. Age and gender were matched in the two groups using propensity score matching (PSM). The basic patient information, BMD and proximal femoral geometry were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in patient age between the two groups of patients before PSM (P>0.05). Both groups were dominated by male patients, but the proportion of males was higher in the ITF group (P<0.01). Low-energy trauma was the predominant injury mechanism in both groups of patients, and the proportion of low-energy injury was higher in the FNF group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in BMD of the cervical area, Wards triangle area, greater trochanter area and total hip area between the two groups, and no significant in incidence of overall low bone mass between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in hip axial length (HAL), neck-shaft angle (NSA) and buckling ratio (BR) between the two groups. However, the cross-sectional area (CSA), cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI) and section modulus (SM) of the ITF group were greater than those of the FNF group (P<0.05). Conclusion In young and middle-aged hip fracture patients, there is no significant difference in BMD between ITF patients and FNF patients. However, the bones of ITF patients have stronger compressive and bending resistance.

Key words: hip fractures, femoral neck fractures, bone density, middle-aged and young adults, proximal femoral geometry

CLC Number:

R683.42

Figures/Tables 3

References 37

[1]	崔爽爽, 赵丽坤, 马信龙. 中国老年髋部骨折流行病学和疾病经济负担研究现状[J]. 中国中西医结合外科杂志, 2020, 26(3):567-570.
	CUI S S, ZHAO L K, MA X L. Research status of epidemiological and economic burden on hip fractures in the elderly in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Surgery, 2020, 26(3):567-570. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-6948.2021.03.034.
[2]	张明师, 盛学鑫, 艾合麦提江·艾尔肯, 等. 术前髋部骨折类型及严重程度与细胞因子及C反应蛋白的相关性研究[J]. 同济大学学报(医学版), 2024, 45(5):721-726.
	ZHANG M S, SHENG X X, AIHEMAITIJIANG A, et al. Serum cytokines and CRP levels in different types and severity of hip fractures[J]. Journal of Tongji University(Medical Science), 2024, 45(5):721-726. doi:10.12289/j.issn.2097-4345.24187.
[3]	苏永彬, 王玲, 赵伟, 等. 老年女性低能量股骨颈骨折与转子间骨折的骨密度差异[J]. 中国骨与关节杂志, 2021, 10(3):235-240.
	SU Y B, WANG L, ZHAO W, et al. Differences in bone mineral density of elderly female patients with low-energy femoral neck fracture and intertrochanteric fracture[J]. Chinese Journal of Bone and Joint, 2021, 10(3):235-240. doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-252X.2021.03.013.
[4]	SENRA A R, CARVALHO D R, SILVA M R, et al. Proximal femur geometry:a major predictor of proximal femur fracture subtypes[J]. Hip Int, 2023, 33(6):1100-1106. doi:10.1177/11207000221129785.
[5]	ZARZOUR F, AFTABI S, LESLIE W D. Effects of femoral neck width and hip axis length on incident hip fracture risk:a registry-based cohort study[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 2025, 40(3):332-338. doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjaf019.
[6]	ANDERSON K B, MOHEBBI M, TEMBO M C, et al. Hip structure and incident fracture:a time-updating survival analysis over 20 years of data from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study[J]. Arch Osteoporos, 2024, 19(1):110. doi:10.1007/s11657-024-01471-7.
[7]	MAEDA Y, SUGANO N, SAITO M, et al. Comparison of femoral morphology and bone mineral density between femoral neck fractures and trochanteric fractures[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2011, 469(3):884-889. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1529-8.
[8]	CHA Y H, YOO J I. Comparison of hip structure analysis and grip strength between femoral neck and basicervical fractures[J]. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2021, 22(1):461. doi:10.1186/s12891-021-04363-w.
[9]	中华医学会骨质疏松和骨矿盐疾病分会. 原发性骨质疏松症诊疗指南(2022)[J]. 中华骨质疏松和骨矿盐疾病杂志, 2022, 15(6):573-611.
	Chinese Society of Osteoporosis and Bone Mineral Research. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of primary osteoporosis(2022)[J]. Chin J Osteoporos Bone Miner Res, 2022, 15(6):573-611. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-2591.2022.06.001.
[10]	李兴国, 邓叶龙, 刘朝晖, 等. 中国老年髋部骨折流行病学特征分析[J]. 实用骨科杂志, 2021, 27(7):601-606.
	LI X G, DENG Y L, LIU Z H, et al. The Epidemiology of hip fractures of the ederly in China[J]. Journal of Practical Orhopaedics, 2021, 27(7): 601-606. doi:1008-5572(2021)07-0601-06.
[11]	刘志伟, 叶欣, 高嘉琪, 等. 2009—2019年北京地区老年髋部骨折流行病学特点及年度变化趋势分析[J]. 北京医学, 2022, 44(6):494-498.
	LIU Z W, YE X, GAO J Q, et al. Epidemiological characteristics and annual change trends of hip fractures in the elderly in some areas of Beijing from 2009 to 2019[J]. Beijing Med J, 2022, 44(6):494-498. doi:10.15932/j.0253-9713.2022.06.005.
[12]	刘刚, 杨明辉, 张京, 等. 北京地区老年髋部骨折的流行病学分布特点:多中心2 071例患者分析[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2022, 24(9):759-765.
	LIU G, YANG M H, ZHANG J, et al. Epidemiological characteristics of geriatric hip fracture in Beijing:a multicenter analysis of 2 071 cases[J]. Chin J Orthop Trauma, 2022, 24(9):759-765. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115530-20220217-00099.
[13]	马仲锋, 冯国英, 齐明. 北京市东部地区髋部骨折发病特点及防治研究[J]. 中国骨质疏松杂志, 2020, 26(4):554-559.
	MA Z F, FENG G Y, QI M. Study on the characteristic and prevention of hip fracture in eastern Beijing[J]. Chin J Osteoporos, 2020, 26(4):554-559. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7108.2020.04.018.
[14]	ALPANTAKI K, PAPADAKI C, RAPTIS K, et al. Gender and age differences in hip fracture types among elderly:a retrospective cohort study[J]. Maedica(Bucur), 2020, 15(2):185-190. doi:10.26574/maedica.2020.15.2.185.
[15]	ROTEM G, SHARFMAN Z T, RATH E, et al. Does hip morphology correlate with proximal femoral fracture type?[J]. Hip Int, 2020, 30(5):629-634. doi:10.1177/1120700019859275.
[16]	LI M, LV H C, LIU J H, et al. Differences in bone mineral density and hip geometry in trochanteric and cervical hip fractures in elderly Chinese patients[J]. Orthop Surg, 2019, 11(2):263-269. doi:10.1111/os.12456.
[17]	HU Z S, LIU X L, ZHANG Y Z. Comparison of proximal femoral geometry and risk factors between femoral neck fractures and femoral intertrochanteric fractures in an elderly Chinese population[J]. Chin Med J(Engl), 2018, 131(21):2524-2530. doi:10.4103/0366-6999.244118.
[18]	BOUXSEIN M L, ZYSSET P, GLÜER C C, et al. Perspectives on the non-invasive evaluation of femoral strength in the assessment of hip fracture risk[J]. Osteoporos Int, 2020, 31(3):393-408. doi:10.1007/s00198-019-05195-0.
[19]	ZHUANG H, LI Y, LIN J, et al. Cortical thickness in the intertrochanteric region may be relevant to hip fracture type[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2017, 18(1):305. doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1669-z.
[20]	CHANG K P, CENTER J R, NGUYEN T V, et al. Incidence of hip and other osteoporotic fractures in elderly men and women:Dubbo osteoporosis epidemiology study[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 2004, 19(4):532-536. doi:10.1359/JBMR.040109.
[21]	CHEVALLEY T, GUILLEY E, HERRMANN F R, et al. Incidence of hip fracture over a 10-year period(1991-2000):reversal of a secular trend[J]. Bone, 2007, 40(5):1284-1289. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2006.12.063.
[22]	HANTOULY A T, ALBARAZANJI A, AI-JUBOORI M, et al. Epidemiology of proximal femur fractures in the young population of Qatar[J]. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 2024, 34(1):21-29. doi:10.1007/s00590-023-03664-1.
[23]	DEKEYSER G J, WILSON J M, KELLAM P J, et al. Young intertrochanteric femur fractures are associated with fewer complications than young femoral neck fractures[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2021, 35(7):356-360. doi:10.1097/BOT.0000000000002005.
[24]	刘泽民, 吕欣, 刘晋元, 等. 髋部骨折2342例流行病学分布特点的单中心分析[J]. 中国组织工程杂志, 2020, 24(32):5085-5091.
	LIU Z M, LYU X, LIU J Y, et al. Epidemiological distribution characteristics of 2 342 cases of hip fracture: a single center analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2020, 24(32):5085-5091. doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2853.
[25]	赵丽坤, 崔爽爽, 马剑雄, 等. 成年股骨颈骨折临床特征分析:一项基于医院的回顾性研究[J]. 中华骨科杂志, 2021, 41(3):157-164.
	ZHAO L K, CUI S S, MA J X, et al. Clinical characteristics analysis of adult femoral neck fracture:a retrospective hospital-based study[J]. Chin J Orthop, 2021, 41(3):157-164. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20200425-00292.
[26]	李长洲, 庞炎旭, 于利, 等. 骨密度在髋部骨质疏松性骨折风险评估中的价值[J]. 中国骨质疏松杂志, 2020, 26(7):1023-1027.
	LI C Z, PANG Y X, YU L, et al. The value of bone mineral density in assessing the risk of osteoporotic hip fractures[J]. Chin J Osteoporos, 2020, 26(7):1023-1027. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-7108.2020.07.017.
[27]	MAZZA E, FERRO Y, PUJIA R, et al. Bending resistance at hip and fractures risk in postmenopausal women independent of bone mineral density[J]. J Clin Densitom, 2022, 25(2):198-207. doi:10.1016/j.jocd.2021.08.001.
[28]	JOHANNESDOTTIR F, POOLE K E, REEVE J, et al. Distribution of cortical bone in the femoral neck and hip fracture:a prospective case-control analysis of 143 incident hip fractures;the AGES-REYKJAVIK study[J]. Bone, 2011, 48(6):1268-1276. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2011.03.776.
[29]	KANAZAWA T, OHMORI T, TODA K, et al. Relationship between site-specific bone mineral density in the proximal femur and instability of proximal femoral fractures:a retrospective study[J]. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2023, 109(5):103496. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2022.103496.
[30]	NAKAMURA N, KYOU T, TAKAOKA K, et al. Bone mineral density in the proximal femur and hip fracture type in the elderly[J]. J Bone Miner Res, 1992, 7(7):755-759. doi:10.1002/jbmr.5650070705.
[31]	RATHBUN A M, MAGAZINER J, SHARDELL M D, et al. Differences in geometric strength at the contralateral hip between men with hip fracture and non-fractured comparators[J]. Bone, 2020, 132:115187. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2019.115187.
[32]	YAMAUCHI K, NAOFUMI M, SUMIDA H, et al. Comparison of morphological features in the femur between femoral neck fractures and femoral intertrochanteric fractures[J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 2016, 38(7):775-780. doi:10.1007/s00276-016-1626-9.
[33]	ZIA ZIABARI S M, JONI S S, FAGHANI M, et al. Comparative study of the neck shaft angle in femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures in north part of Iran[J]. Int J Burns Trauma, 2020, 10(5):225-230.
[34]	VLACHOS C, AMPADIOTAKI M M, PAPAGRIGORAKIS E, et al. Distinctive geometrical traits of proximal femur fractures-original article and review of literature[J]. Medicina(Kaunas), 2023, 59(12):2131. doi:10.3390/medicina59122131.
[35]	JADZIC J, ZAGORAC S, DJURIC M, et al. Hip structure analysis and femoral osteodensitometry in aged postmenopausal women with hip osteoarthritis and femoral neck fracture[J]. Int Orthop, 2022, 46(12):2747-2755. doi:10.1007/s00264-022-05602-y.
[36]	路迪迪, 张平, 刘盼, 等. 社区超重绝经后女性代谢综合征与骨转换指标、髋部骨几何参数的研究[J]. 中华内分泌代谢杂志, 2023, 39(6):479-485.
	LU D D, ZHANG P, LIU P, et al. Bone turnover markers,hip bone geometry parameters and metabolic syndrome in community overweight postmenopausal women[J]. Chin J Endocrinol Metab, 2023, 39(6):479-485. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn311282-20220613-00376.
[37]	LI Y, LIN J, CAI S, et al. Influence of bone mineral density and hip geometry on the different types of hip fracture[J]. Bosn J Basic Med Sci, 2016, 16(1):35-38. doi:10.17305/bjbms.2016.638.

组别	n	年龄/岁	性别（男/女）	BMI/ （kg/m²）	损伤原因（低能量/高能量）
FNF组	77	41（35，48）	59/18	22.97±3.26	58/19
ITF组	55	42（36，46）	54/1	24.58±3.96	32/23
t、Z或χ²		0.088	12.101^＊＊	2.559^＊	4.346^＊

组别	n	年龄/岁	性别（男/女）	BMI/ （kg/m²）	损伤原因（低能量/高能量）
FNF组	77	41（35，48）	59/18	22.97±3.26	58/19
ITF组	55	42（36，46）	54/1	24.58±3.96	32/23
t、Z或χ²		0.088	12.101^＊＊	2.559^＊	4.346^＊

组别	n	年龄/岁	性别（男/女）	BMI/ （kg/m²）	损伤原因（低能量/高能量）
FNF组	55	41（34，48）	54/1	23.59±3.32	38/17
ITF组	55	42（36，46）	54/1	24.58±3.96	32/23
t、Z或χ²		0.081	1.000^▲	1.550	1.414

组别	n	年龄/岁	性别（男/女）	BMI/ （kg/m²）	损伤原因（低能量/高能量）
FNF组	55	41（34，48）	54/1	23.59±3.32	38/17
ITF组	55	42（36，46）	54/1	24.58±3.96	32/23
t、Z或χ²		0.081	1.000^▲	1.550	1.414

组别		n	BMD/（g/cm²）								总体骨量
组别		n	股骨颈		Wards三角		大粗隆		全髋		正常		低骨量
FNF组		55	0.79±0.13		0.62±0.13		0.68±0.13		0.80（0.73，0.94）		36		19
ITF组		55	0.84±0.13		0.63±0.13		0.68±0.13		0.84（0.75，0.93）		45		10
t、Z或χ²			1.924		0.406		0.026		0.444		3.793
组别	股骨近端几何参数
组别	HAL/mm			NSA/°		BR		SM/mm³		CSMI/mm⁴		CSA/mm²
FNF组	116.78±6.56			128.56±2.92		8.30±2.45		622.07±150.04		12 780.20±3 284.69		138.76±25.26
ITF组	117.27±6.65			129.40±4.17		7.82±2.74		703.76±176.60		14 419.13±4 191.75		149.42±27.07
t	0.465			1.200		1.011		2.705^＊＊		2.382^＊		2.244^＊