Literature DB >> 10024389

Comments on the hypotheses underlying fracture risk assessment in osteoporosis as proposed by the World Health Organization.

T Sandor1, D Felsenberg, E Brown.   

Abstract

It was shown in a recent multivariate analysis of lumbar vertebral (L1-L3) CT scans of 171 women without fractures and 57 fractures somewhere in their skeletons, that regional assessment of the spinal mineral distribution can result in the discrimination of the above patient groups with an accuracy of about 90%. This level of discrimination was possible even in those cases with bone densities below the fracture threshold, where the overlap of patients with and without fractures is the greatest and clinically the most significant. In this region this new analytical technique could also identify a subgroup of patients who not yet had a fracture, but for whom all three lumbar vertebrae were classified as osteoporotic. From these results it follows that the osteoporosis model proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO), which assumes that fragility depends only on a single mean value of bone mineral density (BMD) for a patient, is overly simplistic and requires upgrading to include indices representing the distribution of bone mineral.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10024389     DOI: 10.1007/s002239900616

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  9 in total

Review 1.  Analyses of muscular mass and function: the impact on bone mineral density and peak muscle mass.

Authors:  Oliver Fricke; Ralf Beccard; Oliver Semler; Eckhard Schoenau
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 3.714

Review 2.  New laboratory tools in the assessment of bone quality.

Authors:  D Chappard; M F Baslé; E Legrand; M Audran
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Clinical fracture risk evaluated by hierarchical agglomerative clustering.

Authors:  C Kruse; P Eiken; P Vestergaard
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  A review of anatomical and mechanical factors affecting vertebral body integrity.

Authors:  Andrew M Briggs; Alison M Greig; John D Wark; Nicola L Fazzalari; Kim L Bennell
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2004-10-12       Impact factor: 3.738

Review 5.  MRI-based mechanical competence assessment of bone using micro finite element analysis (micro-FEA): Review.

Authors:  Saeed Jerban; Salem Alenezi; Amir Masoud Afsahi; Yajun Ma; Jiang Du; Christine B Chung; Eric Y Chang
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 6.  The peak bone mass concept: is it still relevant?

Authors:  Eckhard Schönau
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 3.714

7.  A study of age-related architectural changes that are most damaging to bones.

Authors:  Yan Song; Michael A K Liebschner; Gemunu H Gunaratne
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2004-09-17       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 8.  Osteoporosis: Its Prosthodontic Considerations - A Review.

Authors:  Vinod Bandela; Bharathi Munagapati; Rajeev K Reddy Karnati; Giridhar Reddy Sirupa Venkata; Simhachalam Reddy Nidudhur
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-12-01

Review 9.  Vertebral body integrity: a review of various anatomical factors involved in the lumbar region.

Authors:  L V Prabhu; V V Saralaya; M M Pai; A V Ranade; G Singh; S Madhyastha
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 5.071

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.