Literature DB >> 10870649

The fallacy of BMD: a critical review of the diagnostic use of dual X-ray absorptiometry.

S P Nielsen1.   

Abstract

The diagnostic use of BMD should be cautious as BMD is not an ideal measure of true bone density; it is not an ideal measure of bone strength; it does not predict fractures well; and it has inherent problems of accuracy and linearity. The limitations of BMD, based on the physical deficiencies of DXA, are further obscured by the introduction of T-scores. It is suggested that BMD and BMC, when used diagnostically and for fracture risk classification, be used after correction for body size and/or bone size, age and sex, and that measured values be evaluated in the light of established mean fracture incidence data. BMD is not a parameter of sufficient validity to be the sole indicator of present and future fracture risk. A low BMD should be regarded one of several fracture risk factors. It seems that there is a need to redefine the T-score based definition of osteoporosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10870649     DOI: 10.1007/s100670050151

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Rheumatol        ISSN: 0770-3198            Impact factor:   2.980


  18 in total

1.  Assessment of anthropometric, systemic, and lifestyle factors influencing bone status in the legs of spinal cord injured individuals.

Authors:  P Eser; A Frotzler; Y Zehnder; H Schiessl; J Denoth
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-05-11       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Comment on Tothill and Hannan: precision and accuracy of measuring changes in bone mineral density by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  G Phillipov; C J Seaborn
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 3.  Bone health and back pain: what do we know and where should we go?

Authors:  A M Briggs; L M Straker; J D Wark
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Microarchitecture and bone quality in the human calcaneus: local variations of fabric anisotropy.

Authors:  Mohammad F Souzanchi; Paolo Palacio-Mancheno; Yury A Borisov; Luis Cardoso; Stephen C Cowin
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 5.  Quantitative phenotyping of bone fracture repair: a review.

Authors:  Michele Casanova; Aaron Schindeler; David Little; Ralph Müller; Philipp Schneider
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2014-07-30

6.  Characterizing microarchitectural changes at the distal radius and tibia in postmenopausal women using HR-pQCT.

Authors:  C E Kawalilak; J D Johnston; W P Olszynski; S A Kontulainen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Robust QCT/FEA models of proximal femur stiffness and fracture load during a sideways fall on the hip.

Authors:  Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Jorn Op Den Buijs; Sean McEligot; Yifei Dai; Rachel C Entwistle; Christina Salas; L Joseph Melton; Kevin E Bennet; Sundeep Khosla; Shreyasee Amin
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2010-10-29       Impact factor: 3.934

8.  High-intensity resistance training and postmenopausal bone loss: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  M Martyn-St James; S Carroll
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-06-01       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  A genomewide scan for quantitative trait loci underlying areal bone size variation in 451 Caucasian families.

Authors:  H Shen; J-R Long; D-H Xiong; Y-F Guo; P Xiao; Y-Z Liu; L-J Zhao; Y-J Liu; H-Y Deng; J-L Li; R R Recker; H-W Deng
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 6.318

10.  Forearm bone mineral density in an unselected population of 2,779 men and women--the HUNT Study, Norway.

Authors:  Siri Forsmo; Arnulf Langhammer; Lisa Forsen; Berit Schei
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-22       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.