Literature DB >> 11605736

Comparison of four morphometric definitions and a semiquantitative consensus reading for assessing prevalent vertebral fractures.

F Grados1, C Roux, M C de Vernejoul, G Utard, J L Sebert, P Fardellone.   

Abstract

The assessment of vertebral fracture in patients with osteoporosis by conventional radiography has been improved over the past 10 years using either the semiquantitative (SQ) method devised by Genant et al. or quantitative morphometry. However, there is still no internationally agreed definition for vertebral fracture and there have been few comparative studies between these different approaches. Our study assessed the reproducibility of the SQ method and of four commonly used morphometric algorithms (Melton's, Eastell's, Minne's and McCloskey's methods) for assessing prevalent vertebral fractures, and examined the agreement of each morphometric algorithm with a SQ consensus reading performed by three experts. With this consensus reading in place of a gold standard, we determined relative measures of sensitivity, specificity and optimal cutoff threshold for each morphometric algorithm. The study was conducted in 39 postmenopausal women who had at least one osteoporotic vertebral fracture. Normal values were derived from 84 healthy postmenopausal women with apparently normal vertebral bodies. Our results indicate that the concordance of SQ method was excellent (intraobserver agreement on serial radiographs = 96.4%, kappa = 0.91; agreement between individual readings and the consensus reading = 98%, kappa = 0.95). Three morphometric approaches demonstrated good intra- and interobserver concordance (Melton: intraobserver agreement on serial radiographs = 92.7%, kappa = 0.82, interobserver agreement = 91.1%, kappa = 0.79; Eastell: intraobserver agreement on serial radiographs = 87.6%, kappa = 0.66, interobserver agreement = 88.6%, kappa = 0.68; McCloskey: intraobserver agreement on serial radiographs = 91.5%, kappa = 0.72, interobserver agreement = 93.9%, kappa = 0.78). Except for McCloskey's method, the optimal cutoff thresholds defined in our study by highest kappa score or Youden index in comparison with the SQ consensus reading were near the cutoff thresholds that were arbitrarily fixed. The four morphometric algorithms provided a good agreement with the results of the SQ consensus reading, but the more complex algorithm did not provide better results and even if we adjusted the cutoff threshold, no morphometric algorithm agreed perfectly with the SQ consensus reading. We conclude that morphometric approaches currently used should not be employed alone to detect prevalent vertebral fractures in studies on osteoporosis, but should rather be used in combination with a visual assessment. The SQ approach that allows differential diagnosis of vertebral deformities and has demonstrated a better reproducibility can be employed alone when it is performed by experienced and well-trained readers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11605736     DOI: 10.1007/s001980170046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  31 in total

1.  Targeted education improves the very low recognition of vertebral fractures and osteoporosis management by general internists.

Authors:  P Casez; B Uebelhart; J-M Gaspoz; S Ferrari; M Louis-Simonet; R Rizzoli
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-04-22       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Comparison of strategies for setting intervention thresholds for Chinese postmenopausal women using the FRAX model.

Authors:  Shu-Ying Liu; Meng Huang; Rong Chen; Na Ding; Hong Liu; Zhong-Jian Xie; Zhi-Feng Sheng; Bi-Hua Luo; Yang-Na Ou
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.633

3.  Vertebral fracture assessment by dual X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  J Fechtenbaum; S Kolta; K Briot; C Roux
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-12-12       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Mortality and incident vertebral fractures after 3 years of follow-up among geriatric patients.

Authors:  H C van der Jagt-Willems; M Vis; C R Tulner; J P C M van Campen; A D Woolf; B C van Munster; W F Lems
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-09-29       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 5.  Identifying osteoporotic vertebral fracture.

Authors:  James F Griffith
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2015-08

6.  Underreported vertebral fractures in an Italian population: comparison of plain radiographs vs quantitative measurements.

Authors:  G Difede; G Scalzo; S Bucchieri; G Moretti; G Campisi; N Napoli; G Battista Rini; G Guglielmi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  The accuracy of historical height loss for the detection of vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  K Siminoski; R S Warshawski; H Jen; K Lee
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Observer agreement in pediatric semiquantitative vertebral fracture diagnosis.

Authors:  Kerry Siminoski; Brian Lentle; Mary Ann Matzinger; Nazih Shenouda; Leanne M Ward
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2013-12-10

Review 9.  Assessment of prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in osteoporosis research.

Authors:  H K Genant; M Jergas
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-03-12       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Comparison of methods for the visual identification of prevalent vertebral fracture in osteoporosis.

Authors:  G Jiang; R Eastell; N A Barrington; L Ferrar
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-04-08       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.