Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 27, 2025

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts
Published on: January 29, 2018
Bone mineral density and low bone mass in severely burned patients: A retrospective cohort study
Salvador Israel Macías-Hernández1, Rafael Zepeda-Mora1, Laura Torres-Mondragón2
1Department of Orthopedic Rehabilitation, Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra, Mexico City, Mexico.
Introduction:
Severe burns can alter bone metabolism through different mechanisms. Despite prior published studies describing the association between burns and a decrease in bone mineral density (BMD), no clinical guidelines currently exist recommending the systematic evaluation of bone health in patients after severe burns. This study aims to describe the BMD of individuals with severe burn injuries and healthy controls and determine the frequency of low-to-normal bone mass (LNBM) and BMD below the expected range for age (BEA).
Materials And Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort of patients with either severe thermal or electrical burns and healthy controls paired by gender and age. We performed a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at least 90 days after the burn and collected data from each patient's clinical evaluation and clinical file.
Results:
A total of 77 patients (64 men and 13 women) and their paired controls were included in the study (age [mean ± standard deviation, SD]: 30.37 ± 8.66 years). Patients participated in the study an average of 315 ± 438 days after their burn. The BMD (grs/cm2) in total hip burned vs controls was: 0.998 ± 0.135 vs 1.059 ± 0.12 (p = 0.004); femoral neck 0.876 ± 0.121 vs 0.915 ± 0.097 (p = 0.031), spine 0.977 ± 0.127 vs 1.003 ± 0.076 (p = 0.132).The Z-scores for total hip were - 0.06 ± 1.05 vs 0.41 ± 0.80 (p = 0.002); for neck -0.39 ± 0.89 vs -0.01 ± 0.77 (p = 0.005); and for spine -0.75 ± 1.11 vs -0.32 ± 0.73 (p = 0.005). The proportion of subjects with BMD BEA in burns vs controls was 5.2 vs 1.2% (p = 0.05) in total hip, 3.9 vs 0% (p = 0.045) in the neck, and 18.2 vs 1.2% (p = 0.001) in the spine. The logistic regression model found-in burn patients vs controls-an OR of 9.83 for BMD BEA (CI 95%: 2.17-44.45, p = 003), OR = 4.05 for electrical burns (CI 95%: 1.72-20.89, p = 004) and OR = 15.16 for thermal burns (CI 95%: 2.91-79.00, p = 001). The model also found an OR = 2.48 for LNBM (CI 95%: 1.25-4.93, p = 0.009). The burn variables associated with BMD BEA at any site in the patients were BMI >25 Kg/m2 with an OR = 0.180 (CI 95%: 0.046-0.710, p = 0.014); and the lower limb amputation with an OR = 7.33 (CI 95%; 1.12-48.33, p = 0.038). Five burn patients had a fragility fracture.
Conclusion:
BMD was significantly lower in severely burned patients than in controls, and the proportion BMD BEA cases was significantly higher in the burn patient sample. Severe burns are a strong independent predictor of bone loss, and this risk is maintained for an extended period after the burn.
More Related Videos
10:39Longitudinal Evaluation of Mouse Hind Limb Bone Loss After Spinal Cord Injury using Novel, in vivo, Methodology
Published on: December 7, 2011
07:12Semiautomated Longitudinal Microcomputed Tomography-based Quantitative Structural Analysis of a Nude Rat Osteoporosis-related Vertebral Fracture Model
Published on: September 28, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Bone Disorders
Bone deposition is also affected by the levels of sex hormones like estrogen and testosterone that promote osteoblast activity and bone matrix synthesis. When the level of these hormones decreases due to aging, it causes a reduction in bone deposition. As a result, bone resorption by osteoclasts...
Osteoclasts in Bone Remodeling
Bone Remodeling
Bone Marrow Sampling and Transplants
The transplant begins with high doses of chemotherapy and radiation treatment, which aim to destroy...