Issue 40

I. Doulamis et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 40 (2017) 85-94; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.40.08 91 C being the smallest of the two groups. The major axis of group A was also smaller that group B and C by 7% (p=0.026) and 5% (p=0.004) respectively. The thickness of group C was bigger than group B by 15% (p=0.010). Finally the ultimate stress of group A was higher than B and C by 25% (p=0.021) and 24% (p=0.001) respectively (Fig. 4). Pearson correlation analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between serum glucose and fracture force (r=0.560, N=18, p=0.016) and between glucose and energy (r=0.660, N=18, p=0.008) (Fig. 5a,b). Body mass was strongly and positively correlated to fracture force (r=0.606, N=18, p=0.008) and negatively correlated to minor axis length (b) (r=- 0.644, N=18, p=0.004) (Fig. 5c,d). T-CHOL was negatively correlated to minor axis length (r=-0.644, N=18, p=0.011) (Fig. 5e). The aforementioned correlations indicate that fracture force tends to be higher in animals with higher glucose levels and in animals with higher body mass. Moreover, fracture energy tends also to be higher in animals with higher glucose levels while the minor axis (b) appears to be smaller in animals with higher levels of T-CHOL and in animals with higher body mass. Figure 5 : Correlations between biomechanical parameters, body mass and biochemical measurements. y = 0.0675x + 7.1551 R² = 0.3137 0 5 10 15 20 50 100 150 200 Fracture force (N) Glucose (mg/dL) y = 0.0299x - 0.419 R² = 0.4359 0 2 4 6 50 100 150 200 Energy (Nmm) Glucose (mg/dL) y = 0.4267x + 1.0464 R² = 0.367 0 5 10 15 20 5 15 25 35 45 Fracture force (N) Bodymass (g) y = -0.0188x + 2.1768 R² = 0.415 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 1 11 21 31 41 b (mm) Bodymass (g) (a) (b) (c) (d) y = -0.0026x + 1.8432 R² = 0.3376 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 1 51 101 151 201 b (mm) T-CHOL(mg/dL) (e)