Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bone cross-sectional geometry in male runners, gymnasts, swimmers and non-athletic controls: a hip-structural analysis study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Applied Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Loading of the skeleton is important for the development of a functionally and mechanically appropriate bone structure, and can be achieved through impact exercise. Proximal femur cross-sectional geometry was assessed in the male athletes (n = 55) representing gymnastics, endurance running and swimming, and non-athletic controls (n = 22). Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (iDXA, GE Healthcare, UK) measurements of the total body (for body composition) and the left proximal femur were obtained. Advanced hip structural analysis (AHA) was utilised to determine the areal bone mineral density (aBMD), hip axis length (HAL), cross-sectional area (CSA), cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI) and the femoral strength index (FSI). Gymnasts and runners had greater age, height and weight adjusted aBMD than in swimmers and controls (p < 0.05). Gymnasts and runners had greater resistance to axial loads (CSA) and the runners had increased resistance against bending forces (CSMI) compared to swimmers and controls (p < 0.01). Controls had a lower FSI compared to gymnasts and runners (1.4 vs. 1.8 and 2.1, respectively, p < 0.005). Lean mass correlated with aBMD, CSA and FSI (r = 0.365–0.457, p < 0.01), particularly in controls (r = 0.657–0.759, p < 0.005). Skeletal loading through the gymnastics and running appears to confer a superior bone geometrical advantage in the young adult men. The importance of lean body mass appears to be of particular significance for non-athletes. Further characterisation of the bone structural advantages associated with different sports would be of value to inform the strategies directed at maximising bone strength and thus, preventing fracture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beck TJ, Ruff CB, Warden KE, Scott WW, Rao GU (1990) Predicting femoral neck strength form bone mineral data: a structural approach. Invest Radiol 25(1):6–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brenban S, Chappard C, Jaffre C et al. (2011) Positive influence of long lasting and intensive weight bearing physical activity on hip structure of young adults. J Clin Densitom [EPub ahead of print]

  • DiVasta AD, Beck TJ, Petit M, Felderman HA, LeBoff MS, Gordon CM (2007) Bone cross sectional geometry in adolescent girls and young women with anorexia-nervosa: a hip structural analysis study. Osteoporos Int 18:797–804

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duan Y, Duboeuf F, Munoz F, Delmas PD, Seeman E (2006) The fracture risk index and use as prediction of vertebral structural failure. Osteoporos Int 17(1):54–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner KG, Wacker WK, Barden C, Simonelli C, Burke PK, Ragi S, Del Rio L (2006) Femur strength index predicted hip fractures independent of bone density and hip axis length. Osteoporos Int 17(4):593–599

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Forwood MR, Turner CH (1995) Skeletal adaptations to mechanical usage: results from tibial loading studies in rats. Bone 17(4):S197–S205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fredricson M, Chew K, Ngo J, Cleek T, Kiratti J, Cobb K (2007) Regional bone mineral density in men athletes: a comparison of soccer players, runners and controls. Br J Sp Med 41:664–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haapasalo H, Kontulainen S, Sievanen H, Kannus P, Jarvinen M, Vuori I (2000) Exercise-induced bone gain is due to an enlargement in bone size without changes in volumetric bone density: a peripheral quantitative computed tomography study of the upper arms of male tennis players. Bone 27:351–357

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hind K, Burrows M (2007) Weight-bearing exercise and bone mineral accrual in children and adolescents: a systematic review of controlled trials. Bone 40:14–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hind K, Truscott JG, Evans JE (2006) Low lumbar spine bone mineral density in both male and female endurance runners. Bone 39:880–885

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hind K, Oldroyd B, Truscott J (2011) In vivo short term precision of the GE Lunar iDXA for the measurement of total body, lumbar spine and femoral bone mineral density in adults. J Clin Densitom 13(4):413–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janz KF, Gilmore JM, Levy SM, Letuchy EM, Burns TL, Beck TJ (2007) Physical activity and femoral neck bone strength during childhood: the Iowa bone development study. Bone 41(2):216–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptoge S, Beck T, Reeve J, Stone K, Hillier T, Cauley J, Cummings SR (2008) Prediction of incident hip fracture by femur geometry variables measured by hip structural analysis in the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Min Res 23(12):1892–1904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson MK, Alborg HG, Obrant K, Nyquist F, Lindenberg H, Karlsson C (2002) Exercise during growth and young adulthood is associated with reduced fracture risk in old ages. J Bone Miner Res 17 (suppl 1):s297

    Google Scholar 

  • LaCroix AZ, Beck TJ, Cauley JA, Lewis CE, Bassford T, Jackson R, Wu T, Chen Z (2010) Hip structural geometry and incidence of hip fracture in postmenopausal women: what does it add to conventional bone mineral density? Osteoporos Int 21(6):919–929

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • LaMothe JM, Hamilton NH, Zerricke RF (2003) Strain rate influences periosteal adaptation in mature bone. Med Eng Phys 27(4):277–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanyon LE, Rubin CT (1984) Static vs. dynamic loads as an influence on bone remodelling. J Biomech 17:897–905

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leslie WD, Pahlavan PS, Tsang JF, Lix LM (2009) Prediction of hip and other osteoporotic fractures from hip geometry in a large clinical cohort. Osteoporos Int 20(10):1767–1774

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Magknos F, Kavouros S, Yanakorka M et al (2007) The bone response to weight-bearing exercise is sport-, site-, and sex-specific. Clin J Sports Med 17:123–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin BR, Burr DB (1984) Non-invasive measurement of long bone cross sectional moment of inertia by photon absorptiometry. J Biomech 17(3):195–201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto T, Nakagawa S, Nishida S et al (1997) Bone density and bone metabolic markers in active collegiate athletes: findings in long distance runners, judoists and swimmers. Int J Sports Med 18:408–412

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Melton LJ 3rd, Atkinson EJ, O’Conner MK et al (1998) Bone density and fracture risk in men. J Bone Miner Res 13:1915

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nikander R, Sievanen H, Heinonen A, Daley RM, Uusi-Rasi K, Kannus P (2010) Targeted exercise against osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis for optimising bone strength throughout life. BMC Med 8(47):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Pederson EA, Akhler MP, Cullen DM, Kimmel DB, Recker RR (1995) Bone response to in vivo mechanical loading in C3H/HeJ mice. Calcif Tiss Int 65(1):41–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petit M, Beck TJ, Lin HM, Bentley C, Legro T, Lloyd T (2004) Femoral bone structural geometry adapts to mechanical loading and is influenced by sex steroids: the Penn State Young Women’s Health Study. Bone 35:750–759

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prevrhal S, Shepherd JA, Faulkner KG, Gaither KW, Black DM, Lang TF (2008) Comparison of DXA hip structural analysis with volumetric QCT. J Clin Densitom 11(2):232–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenue E (2005) From the mechanostat theory to the development of the ‘functional muscle–bone unit’. J Musculoskel Neuronal Interact 5(2):232–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeman E (2008) Structural basis of growth related gain and age-related loss of bone strength. Rheumatology 47(4):2–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smock AJ, Hughes J, Cobb K et al (2009) Bone volumetric density, geometry and strength in male and female collegiate runners. Med Sci Sport Exerc 41:2026–2032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugiyami T, Price JS, Lanyon LE (2010) Functional adaptation to mechanical loading in both cortical and cancellous bone is controlled locally and confined to the loaded bones. Bone 46(2):314–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Travison TG, Araujo AB, Esche GR, Beck TJ, McKinlay JB (2008) Lean mass and not fat mass is associated with male proximal femur strength. J Bone Min Res 23(2):189–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner CH (2003) Periosteal apposition and fracture risk. J Musculoskelet Neuron Interact 3(4):410

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang XF, Duan Y, Beck TJ, Seeman E (2005) Varying contributions of growth and ageing to racial and sex differences in femoral neck structure and strength in old age. Bone 36:978–986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yates LB, Karasik D, Beck TJ, Cupples LA, Kiel DP (2007) Hip structural geometry in old and old–old age: similarities and differences between men and women. Bone 41(4):722–732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshikawa T, Turner CH, Peacock M, Slemender CW, Weaver CM, Teegarden D, Markwardt P, Burr DB (1994) Geometric structure of the femoral neck measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry. J Bone Miner Res 9:1053–1064

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

There were no sources of external funding for this research study. All the authors do not perceive or have any potential conflicts of interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Research Institute, Leeds Metropolitan University, Headingley Campus, Leeds, LS6 3QS, UK

    Karen Hind, Lisa Gannon, Emma Whatley, Carlton Cooke & John Truscott

Authors
  1. Karen Hind
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lisa Gannon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emma Whatley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carlton Cooke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John Truscott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen Hind.

Additional information

Communicated by Susan A. Ward.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hind, K., Gannon, L., Whatley, E. et al. Bone cross-sectional geometry in male runners, gymnasts, swimmers and non-athletic controls: a hip-structural analysis study. Eur J Appl Physiol 112, 535–541 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-011-2008-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-011-2008-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation