Literature DB >> 11940733

Implications in the use of T-scores for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men.

Kenneth G Faulkner1, Eric Orwoll.   

Abstract

Osteoporosis is recognized as a disorder of both men and women. However, the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of osteoporosis (a bone mineral density [BMD] T-score of -2.5 or less) was formulated for use with postmenopausal women only. In the absence of a BMD-based definition for male osteoporosis, the WHO definition is often applied to men as well. Several important questions exist when considering the use of T-scores in men. First, is the WHO definition appropriate for men? What is the impact of using a -2.5 criteria, in terms of the number of men that would be identified as osteoporotic? When calculating T-scores in men, should male or female young normal values be used? Can the same T-score criteria be used for all skeletal sites and technologies? To address these questions, osteoporosis prevalence estimates for men aged 50 yr and over were generated using WHO methods and manufacturer normative data from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and ultrasound. Estimates were determined for several skeletal sites and technologies using both male and female young normal values. Prevalence estimates were compared to published fracture risk estimates. Mean T-scores declined with age at all measurement sites. Discrepancies were found between the different skeletal sites and techniques, similar to the previously reported differences in women. A -2.5 criterion (based on young normal males or females) appeared to underestimate the prevalence of osteoporosis, except for QCT, which seemed to overestimate risk. Depending on the technique used, 0 to 12.5 million US men 50 yr of age and older would be classified as osteoporotic using the WHO definition. T-Scores based on male norms were less discordant across skeletal sites than female-based T-scores. Male-based T-scores between -1.8 and -2.3 using DXA and ultrasound and -3.1 for QCT provided osteoporosis prevalence estimates that approximated the likelihood of common fractures in men 50 and over. We conclude that the use of single T-score-based criterion for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men has many potential difficulties. BMD measurement techniques provide discrepant estimates of prevalence and may underestimate the size of the male population at risk for fracture. Based on available normative data, a -2.5 criterion underestimates osteoporosis prevalence in men, whether based on male or female norms. Prospective studies are needed to further refinement to the BMD definition of osteoporosis in men.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11940733     DOI: 10.1385/jcd:5:1:087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.963


  20 in total

1.  The tale of the T-score: review and perspective.

Authors:  Kenneth G Faulkner
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-11-23       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the prediction of fragility fracture in men.

Authors:  Stefano Gonnelli; Chiara Cepollaro; Luigi Gennari; Andrea Montagnani; Carla Caffarelli; Daniela Merlotti; Stefania Rossi; Alice Cadirni; Ranuccio Nuti
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Prevalence and determinants of osteoporosis among men aged 50 years or more in Sri Lanka: a community-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Sarath Lekamwasam; Lalith Wijayaratne; Mahinda Rodrigo; Udual Hewage
Journal:  Arch Osteoporos       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 2.617

4.  33% radius evaluation to assess bone mineral density in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Juan Morote; Jacques Planas; Maria Carmen Mir; Carles X Raventós; Gloria Encabo; Andreas Doll
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-12-30       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Gender differences in osteoporosis and fractures.

Authors:  Peggy M Cawthon
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  Male osteoporosis: epidemiology and the pathogenesis of aging bones.

Authors:  Jessica K Lambert; Mone Zaidi; Jeffrey I Mechanick
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.096

7.  Male osteoporosis and androgenic therapy: from testosterone to SARMs.

Authors:  Antonio Cilotti; Alberto Falchetti
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2009-09

8.  Osteoporosis is markedly underdiagnosed: a nationwide study from Denmark.

Authors:  Peter Vestergaard; Lars Rejnmark; Leif Mosekilde
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-06-12       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Muscle-Bone Interactions Across age in Men.

Authors:  Ian J Palmer; Eric D Runnels; Michael G Bemben; Debra A Bemben
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 2.988

10.  Femoral and whole-body bone mineral density in middle-aged and older Norwegian men and women: suitability of the reference values.

Authors:  Clara Gram Gjesdal; Sylvi J Aanderud; Hans-Jacob Haga; Johan G Brun; Grethe S Tell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.