We have located links that may give you full text access.
Lumbar facet joint subchondral bone density in low back pain and asymptomatic subjects.
Skeletal Radiology 2020 April
OBJECTIVE: To report in vivo measurements of lumbar facet joint subchondral bone mineral density used in the description of facet joint loading patterns and to interrogate if low back pain is associated with changes in subchondral bone mineral density.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vivo measurements of lumbar facet joint subchondral bone mineral density (L1/2 to L5/S1) in Hounsfield units were performed on 89 volunteers (56 controls and 33 with low back pain) by computed tomography osteoabsorptiometry at subchondral regions between 1.5 mm and 2.5 mm below the joint surface. The facet surface was divided into five topographic zones: cranial, lateral, caudal, medial, and central.
RESULTS: We analyzed 1780 facet joint surfaces. Facets were denser (p < 0.0001) both in superior facets and in low back pain subjects (p < 0.0001). For the entire cohort, the facet center zone subchondral bone mineral density was higher (p < 0.0001) than that of the peripheral zones. The analyses indicate that subchondral bone mineral density is highest in patients with low back pain, the superior facets, and the center zone of the facets.
CONCLUSIONS: Subchondral bone mineral density is thought to reflect cumulative, long-term distribution of stress acting on a joint. This work shows that higher subchondral bone mineral density values in the center zone indicate predominant stress transmission through the center of the facet joints. Finally, the greater subchondral bone mineral density in patients with low back pain may reflect both increased load bearing by the facets secondary to disc degeneration and misdistribution of loading within the joint.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In vivo measurements of lumbar facet joint subchondral bone mineral density (L1/2 to L5/S1) in Hounsfield units were performed on 89 volunteers (56 controls and 33 with low back pain) by computed tomography osteoabsorptiometry at subchondral regions between 1.5 mm and 2.5 mm below the joint surface. The facet surface was divided into five topographic zones: cranial, lateral, caudal, medial, and central.
RESULTS: We analyzed 1780 facet joint surfaces. Facets were denser (p < 0.0001) both in superior facets and in low back pain subjects (p < 0.0001). For the entire cohort, the facet center zone subchondral bone mineral density was higher (p < 0.0001) than that of the peripheral zones. The analyses indicate that subchondral bone mineral density is highest in patients with low back pain, the superior facets, and the center zone of the facets.
CONCLUSIONS: Subchondral bone mineral density is thought to reflect cumulative, long-term distribution of stress acting on a joint. This work shows that higher subchondral bone mineral density values in the center zone indicate predominant stress transmission through the center of the facet joints. Finally, the greater subchondral bone mineral density in patients with low back pain may reflect both increased load bearing by the facets secondary to disc degeneration and misdistribution of loading within the joint.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app