Literature DB >> 16378167

Risk of new clinical fractures within 2 years following a fracture.

Svenhjalmar van Helden1, Jochen Cals, Fons Kessels, Peter Brink, Geert Jan Dinant, Piet Geusens.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Clinical fractures are associated with an increased relative risk of future fractures, but the absolute risk and timing of new clinical fractures immediately after a clinical fracture have not been reported extensively. The study objective was to determine the absolute risk of subsequent clinical fractures within 2 years after a clinical fracture.
METHODS: We analyzed clinical fracture data from a university hospital recruiting all fractures in the area between January 1999 and December 2001. Subjects were 2,419 male and female patients aged 50 years and older, with a total of 2,575 fractures. There were 139 patients with more than one simultaneous fracture. Mean age was 66 years for males and 72 for females.
RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of patients with new clinical fractures over 2 years was 10.8% (262/2,419). In the 262 patients with subsequent fractures, we observed a higher mean age, more females and more often multiple baseline fractures compared with the 2,157 patients without subsequent fractures. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that age, gender and having multiple baseline fractures contributed significantly to cumulative new fracture incidence. Cox regression showed that these variables independently contributed to a higher subsequent fracture incidence. New fracture incidence was higher with increasing age ( p <0.001; hazard ratio [HR] 1.2 per decade; confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.3). Females had a new fracture incidence of 12.2% compared with 7.4% in males ( p =0.015; HR 1.5; CI 1.1-2.0). Patients with multiple baseline fractures had a new fracture incidence of 17.3% compared with 10.4% for subjects with one baseline fracture ( p =0.006; HR 1.8; CI 1.2-2.7). Of all clinical fractures occurring within 2 years after a clinical fracture, 60% occurred during the first year and 40% during the second year ( p =0.005). The absolute risk to develop an incident clinical fracture within 2 years after any clinical fracture was 10.8%. Increased age, female gender and the presence of multiple simultaneous fractures at baseline each independently increased the risk of incident fracture. Significantly more fractures occurred in the first year following the index fracture than in the second year.
CONCLUSION: Altogether, these data support the need for early prevention of future fracture among individuals with a fracture after age 50, using interventions which have been shown to have a rapid anti-fracture benefit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16378167     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-005-2026-x

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


  10 in total

1.  Validity of self-report of fractures: results from a prospective study in men and women across Europe. EPOS Study Group. European Prospective Osteoporosis Study Group.

Authors:  A A Ismail; T W O'Neill; W Cockerill; J D Finn; J B Cannata; K Hoszowski; O Johnell; C Matthis; H Raspe; A Raspe; J Reeve; A J Silman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: a summary of the literature and statistical synthesis.

Authors:  C M Klotzbuecher; P D Ross; P B Landsman; T A Abbott; M Berger
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Risk of new vertebral fracture in the year following a fracture.

Authors:  R Lindsay; S L Silverman; C Cooper; D A Hanley; I Barton; S B Broy; A Licata; L Benhamou; P Geusens; K Flowers; H Stracke; E Seeman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-01-17       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 4.  The patient with fracture: the risk of subsequent fractures.

Authors:  A J Silman
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1995-02-27       Impact factor: 4.965

5.  Prediction of perimenopausal fractures by bone mineral density and other risk factors.

Authors:  D J Torgerson; M K Campbell; R E Thomas; D M Reid
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Individuals who sustain nonosteoporotic fractures continue to also sustain fragility fractures.

Authors:  M K Karlsson; R Hasserius; K J Obrant
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  Risk factors for incident vertebral fractures in men and women: the Rotterdam Study.

Authors:  Marjolein van der Klift; Chris E D H de Laet; Eugene V McCloskey; Olof Johnell; John A Kanis; Albert Hofman; Huibert A P Pols
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2004-02-23       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 8.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

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

9.  Fracture risk following an osteoporotic fracture.

Authors:  O Johnell; J A Kanis; A Odén; I Sernbo; I Redlund-Johnell; C Petterson; C De Laet; B Jönsson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-12-23       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Osteoporotic fracture: missed opportunity for intervention.

Authors:  Leah Port; Jacqueline Center; N Kathy Briffa; Tuan Nguyen; Robert Cumming; John Eisman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-08-07       Impact factor: 4.507

  10 in total
  39 in total

1.  Intra-and inter-reader reliability of semi-automated quantitative morphometry measurements and vertebral fracture assessment using lateral scout views from computed tomography.

Authors:  Y M Kim; S Demissie; R Eisenberg; E J Samelson; D P Kiel; M L Bouxsein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Clinical relevance of vertebral fractures.

Authors:  W F Lems
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 19.103

Review 3.  Fracture liaison services: do they reduce fracture rates?

Authors:  Irma J A de Bruin; Caroline E Wyers; Joop P W van den Bergh; Piet P M M Geusens
Journal:  Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 5.346

Review 4.  Osteoporosis and the orthopaedic surgeon: basic concepts for successful co-management of patients' bone health.

Authors:  Ryan P Farmer; Benoit Herbert; Derly O Cuellar; Jiandong Hao; Philip F Stahel; Robin Yasui; David J Hak; Cyril Mauffrey
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Can Hip Fracture Prediction in Women be Estimated beyond Bone Mineral Density Measurement Alone?

Authors:  Piet Geusens; Tineke van Geel; Joop van den Bergh
Journal:  Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 5.346

6.  Five-year refracture rates of a province-wide fracture liaison service.

Authors:  R Sujic; D E Beaton; M Mamdani; S M Cadarette; J Luo; S Jaglal; J E M Sale; R Jain; E Bogoch
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  [Kyphoplasty : method for minimally invasive treatment of painful vertebral fractures].

Authors:  C Kasperk; G Nöldge; P Meeder; P Nawroth; F X Huber
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 0.955

8.  New perspectives on the definition and the management of severe osteoporosis: the patient with two or more fragility fractures.

Authors:  R Nuti; M L Brandi; G Isaia; U Tarantino; S Silvestri; S Adami
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.256

9.  Is health-related quality of life associated with the risk of low-energy wrist fracture: a case-control study.

Authors:  Gudrun Rohde; Anne M Mengshoel; Astrid K Wahl; Torbjorn Moum; Glenn Haugeberg
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-07-03       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 10.  Progress in osteoporosis and fracture prevention: focus on postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Kenneth G Saag; Piet Geusens
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.