4.4 Article

Osteocyte Deficiency in Hip Fractures

期刊

CALCIFIED TISSUE INTERNATIONAL
卷 89, 期 4, 页码 327-334

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00223-011-9522-0

关键词

FGF23; Osteocytes; Osteoporosis; PHEX; Sclerostin

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III/Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias [FIS 09/0539]
  2. IFIMAV

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Osteocytes play a central role in the regulation of bone remodeling. The aim of this study was to explore osteocyte function, and particularly the expression of SOST, a Wnt inhibitor, in patients with hip fractures. Serum sclerostin levels were measured by ELISA. The expression of several osteocytic genes was studied by quantitative PCR in trabecular samples of the femoral head of patients with hip fractures, hip osteoarthritis and control subjects. The presence of sclerostin protein and activated caspase 3 was revealed by immunostaining. There were no significant differences in serum sclerostin between the three groups. Patients with fractures have fewer lacunae occupied by osteocytes (60 +/- 5% vs. 64 +/- 6% in control subjects, P = 0.014) and higher numbers of osteocytes expressing activated caspase 3, a marker of apoptosis. The proportion of sclerostin-positive lacunae was lower in patients with fractures than in control subjects (34 +/- 11% vs. 69 +/- 10%, P = 2 x 10(-8)). The proportion of sclerostin-positive osteocytes was also lower in patients. RNA transcripts of SOST, FGF23 and PHEX were also less abundant in fractures than in control bones (P = 0.002, 5 x 10(-6), and 0.04, respectively). On the contrary, in patients with osteoarthritis, there was a decreased expression of SOST and FGF23, without differences in PHEX transcripts or osteocyte numbers. Osteocyte activity is altered in patients with hip fractures, with increased osteocyte apoptosis and reduced osteocyte numbers, as well as decreased transcription of osteocytic genes. Therefore, these results suggest that an osteocyte deficiency may play a role in the propensity to hip fractures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据