X-ray, CT and DXA study of bone loss on medieval remains from North-West Italy

Technical note: Application and potentiality of quantitative ultrasonometry for the evaluation of bone mineral density status

The evaluation of bone mineral density (BMD) is an important task in paleopathology. Techniques commonly applied in bone quantity assessment, such as DXA or radiogrammetry (XR), suffer from several limitations when applied to skeletal remains. In recently published research, we developed a new methodology and new reference curves for the evaluation of BMD on human skeletal remains, applying for the first time Quantitative Ultrasonometry (QUS), a user-friendly, portable, and reliable clinical technique. This study aims to apply this new methodology to an archeological sample and to compare the results with those obtained through XR. We apply QUS and XR to a sample of 104 adults from Medieval Italian cemeteries. Fragility fractures were recorded. Descriptive statistics and comparisons between sexes, age-at-death cohorts, and individuals with and without fragility fractures were performed. Moreover, univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to define the parameters most predictive of fracture risk in past populations. The comparison between sexes showed no significant results concerning BMD parameters, whereas a decrease in BMD with increasing age is confirmed. The comparison between fracture and non-fracture individuals and the logit model demonstrated that QUS parameters, especially UBPI, are more reliable predictors of fracture risk in comparison to XR. Our results confirmed that QUS is a valuable technique that can be efficiently applied to archeological remains, also considering its portability. We also propose a modification of the previously published QUS standard curves, to easily assess osteopenia and osteoporosis in archeological material.

Social stratification reflected in bone mineral density and stature: Spectral imaging and osteoarchaeological findings from medieval Norway

This study presents skeletal material from five medieval burial sites in Eastern Norway, confined to one royal burial church, one Dominican monastery, and three burial sites representing parish populations. We combine osteological analysis and Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry, studying the remains of 227 individuals (102 females and 125 males) employing young, middle, and old adult age categories. The aim is to assess bone mineral density as a skeletal indicator of socioeconomic status including stature as a variable. We detected that socioeconomic status significantly affected bone mineral density and stature. Individuals of high status had higher bone mineral density (0.07 g/cm2, p = 0.003) and taller stature (1.85 cm, p = 0.017) than individuals from the parish population. We detected no significant relationship between young adult bone mineral density and socioeconomic status (p = 0.127 and 0.059 for females and males, respectively). For males, high young adult bone mineral density and stature varied concordantly in both status groups. In contrast, females of high status were significantly taller than females in the parish population (p = 0.011). Our findings indicate quite different conditions during growth and puberty for the two groups of females. The age-related pattern of bone variation also portrayed quite different trajectories for the two socioeconomic status groups of both sexes. We discuss sociocultural practices (living conditions during childhood and puberty, as well as nutritional and lifestyle factors in adult life), possibly explaining the differences in bone mineral density between the high-status and parish population groups. The observation of greater differences in bone mineral density and stature for females than males in the medieval society of Norway is also further discussed.

Approaches to osteoporosis in paleopathology: How did methodology shape bone loss research?

OBJECTIVE

This paper will review how different methods employed to study bone loss in the past were used to explore different questions and aspects of bone loss, how methodology has changed over time, and how these different approaches have informed our understanding of bone loss in the past.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A review and discussion is conducted on research protocols and results of 84 paleopathology publications on bone loss in archaeological skeletal collections published between 1969 and 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

The variety in research protocols confounds accurate meta-analysis of previously published research; however, more recent publications incorporate a combination of bone mass and bone quality based methods. Biased sample selection has resulted in a predominance of European and Medieval publications, limiting more general observations on bone loss in the past. Collection of dietary or paleopathological covariables is underemployed in the effort to interpret bone loss patterns.

SIGNIFICANCE

Paleopathology publications have demonstrated differences in bone loss between distinct archaeological populations, between sex and age groups, and have suggested factors underlying observed differences. However, a lack of a gold standard has encouraged the use of a wide range of methods. Understanding how this array of methods effects results is crucial in contextualizing our knowledge of bone loss in the past.

LIMITATIONS

The development of a research protocol is also influenced by available expertise, available equipment, restrictions imposed by the curator, and site-specific taphonomic aspects. These factors will likely continue to cause (minor) biases even if a best practice can be established.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Greater effort to develop uniform terminology and operational definitions of osteoporosis in skeletal remains, as well as the expansion of time scale and geographical areas studied. The Next-Generation Sequencing revolution has also opened up the possibility of ancient DNA analyses to study genetic predisposition to bone loss in the past.