Metacarpal cortical bone loss and osteoporotic fractures in the Coimbra Identified Skeletal Collection

Abstract

There has been considerable progress in recent years in our understanding of the patterns of cortical bone loss in the second metacarpal in archeological skeletal samples. Nevertheless, cortical data from reference skeletal collections are insufficient, and the possible connection of metacarpal cortical parameters with osteoporotic fractures has not been thoroughly addressed. As such, this article aims to identify and explain sex‐specific and age‐associated metacarpal cortical bone loss in a large sample (N = 302; females: 154/males: 148) from the Coimbra Identified Skeletal Collection. Another objective is to evaluate the association of cortical and demographic features with osteoporotic fractures. Age‐related endocortical bone loss is significant in women but not evident in men. Periosteal accretion of the bone is absent in both sexes. Overall, there is a net loss of the cortical bone in women, whereas cortical bone strength seems to be preserved in men. The prevalence of osteoporotic fractures is similar in both sexes, with age at death significantly influencing the probability of exhibiting a fracture. Metacarpal cortical index does not seem to be an independent risk factor for osteoporotic fractures in this sample.

Massa Óssea Cortical do Fémur numa Coleção Esquelética de Referência Portuguesa

“…The differences between the sexes in cortical bone loss have been detailed both in modern (e.g., Virtamä and Helelä, 1969;Maggio et al, 1995;Ginsburg et al, 2001) and historical populations (e.g., Carlson et al, 1976;Mays et al, 1998;Drusini et al, 2000;Ives, 2007;Glencross and Agarwal, 2011;Umbelino et al, 2016). In the same skeletal collection but with a different sample, radiogram- metry of the second metacarpal also exposed significant differences between sexes (Curate et al, 2015).…”

“…Cortical bone changes were significantly related with age only in females, with results showing signs of gendered trajectories of age-related cortical bone loss. In the second metacarpal, cortical index and medullary width were significantly associated with age in both sexes (Curate et al, 2015). Femoral medullary cavity enlarges in the course of aging as a result of imbalance of endosteal bone formation and resorption that leads to endocortical bone loss (Jergas, 2008).…”

“…At the same time, radiogrammetry is still widely used in studies concerned with specific pathological conditions (Böttcher and Pfeil, 2008). Radiogrammetry of the second metacarpal has been favored in anthropological studies of cortical bone (e.g., Ekenman et al, 1995;Mays, 1996;Lazenby, 1998;Mays, 2000;Rewekant, 2001;Mays, 2006;Ives, 2007;Beauchesne and Agarwal, 2014;Curate, 2011;Glencross and Agarwal, 2011;Robb et al, 2012;Curate et al, 2015;Umbelino et al, 2016). Less often, the humerus, femur and tibia have also been used to evaluate cortical bone loss in skeletal samples (e.g., van Gerven et al, 1969;Bergot and Bocquet, 1976;Bloom et al, 1984;DeRousseau, 1985;González--Reimers et al, 1998;Mays et al, 1998).…”

Interpreting injury recidivism in a rural post‐medieval male individual from Bucelas, Portugal

“…Digital radiography analysis of the right femur (60 kV, 56.0 mA) and the left second metacarpal (60 kV, 20.0 mA) was implemented with Siemens Iconos R200 equipment and Kodak DirectView CR850 film. The cortical index (MCI) at the second metacarpal midpoint was estimated according to Ives and Brickley (2004) and the Z ‐Score (describes a value's association with the mean of a group of values, being measured in terms of standard deviations from the mean) was calculated comparing the obtained value with the sample means for late 19th to early 20th centuries older males provided by Curate et al (2019). The palaeopathological analysis followed the recommendations detailed in standard textbooks (Buikstra, 2019; Buikstra & Ubelaker, 1994; Ortner, 2003).…”

Quantifying cortical bone in fragmentary archeological second metacarpals

“…For bioarcheologists, traditional radiogrammetry has proven easily accessible in field and laboratory contexts and continues to be used as a key method for investigating age‐related bone loss and osteoporosis in past populations (e.g., Beauchesne & Agarwal, 2011, 2017; Curate et al, 2019; Umbelino et al, 2019). This method is limited by the requirement that metacarpal radiogrammetric measurements should be taken at the midshaft, meaning only complete elements can be reliably measured (Ives & Brickley, 2004).…”