Literature DB >> 16036071

Quantitative ultrasound: use in the detection of fractures and in the assessment of bone composition.

Claus-C Glüer1, Reinhard Barkmann.   

Abstract

Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) techniques have found widespread clinical use, but their specific role in clinical practice needs further refinement. This review discusses the ability of QUS approaches to predict the risk for prevalent vertebral fractures and the risk for future fractures. QUS approaches perform as well as central dual x-ray absorptiometry devices but with some disadvantages (at least for older QUS approaches) with regard to the predictive power for hip fractures. Technologic diversity of QUS approaches may lead to differences in performance. QUS also has the potential for assessing bone mineral density-independent aspects of bone composition that are relevant for bone strength. For measurements at the calcaneus, it is evident that bone microstructure is the key determinant of QUS variables obtained. However, in most cases, microstructure is so highly correlated with bone mineral density that no separate assessment can be performed in clinical practice. At cortical sites, a selective assessment of bone properties is easier. Technologies need to be adapted to this purpose because requirements differ significantly from those desired for optimum fracture risk assessment. More importantly, multiple partially independent QUS variables need to be defined to assess complementary aspects of bone tissue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 16036071     DOI: 10.1007/s11914-996-0003-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep        ISSN: 1544-1873            Impact factor:   5.096


  59 in total

1.  Phase and group velocities of fast and slow compressional waves in trabecular bone.

Authors:  F Padilla; P Laugier
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  The role of collagen abnormalities in ultrasound and densitometry assessment: In vivo evidence.

Authors:  S Cheng; F A Tylavsky; E S Orwoll; J Y Rho; L D Carbone
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Ultrasonic wave propagation in cancellous and cortical bone: prediction of some experimental results by Biot's theory.

Authors:  J L Williams
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Ultrasound measurements for the prediction of osteoporotic fractures in elderly people.

Authors:  S M Pluijm; W C Graafmans; L M Bouter; P Lips
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 5.  The use of ultrasound in the assessment of bone status.

Authors:  S Gonnelli; C Cepollaro
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.256

6.  Evaluation of cortical bone by computed tomography.

Authors:  T N Hangartner; V Gilsanz
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Scanning acoustic microscope studies of the elastic properties of osteons and osteon lamellae.

Authors:  J L Katz; A Meunier
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.097

8.  An in vitro investigation of the dependence on sample thickness of the speed of sound along the specimen.

Authors:  C F Njeh; D Hans; C Wu; E Kantorovich; M Sister; T Fuerst; H K Genant
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.242

9.  Prevalent vertebral deformities predict increased mortality and increased fracture rate in both men and women: a 10-year population-based study of 598 individuals from the Swedish cohort in the European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  R Hasserius; M K Karlsson; B E Nilsson; I Redlund-Johnell; O Johnell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 10.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  John A Kanis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  5 in total

1.  Longitudinal changes in calcaneal quantitative ultrasound measures during childhood.

Authors:  M Lee; R W Nahhas; A C Choh; E W Demerath; D L Duren; W C Chumlea; R J Sherwood; B Towne; R M Siervogel; S A Czerwinski
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 2.  Biomechanical behaviours of the bone-implant interface: a review.

Authors:  Xing Gao; Manon Fraulob; Guillaume Haïat
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Application of the dual-frequency ultrasonometer for osteoporosis detection.

Authors:  Armen Sarvazyan; Alexey Tatarinov; Vladimir Egorov; Souren Airapetian; Victor Kurtenok; Charles J Gatt
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Predictive ability of heel quantitative ultrasound for incident fractures: an individual-level meta-analysis.

Authors:  E V McCloskey; J A Kanis; A Odén; N C Harvey; D Bauer; J González-Macias; D Hans; S Kaptoge; M A Krieg; T Kwok; F Marin; A Moayyeri; E Orwoll; C Gluёr; H Johansson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-02-18       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  First meeting on bone quality, Abbaye des Vaux de Cernay, France, 15-16 June 2006: Bone architecture.

Authors: 
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.071

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.