Literature DB >> 17019523

The prevalence of significant left-right differences in hip bone mineral density.

R Hamdy1, G M Kiebzak, E Seier, N B Watts.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We determined the prevalence of left-right differences in hip bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and the resultant consequence, namely: the frequency at which patients would be classified differently if lumbar spine and only one hip (rather than both hips) were measured.
METHODS: This was a retrospective DXA scan reanalysis of 3012 white women >or=50 yrs who had scans of both hips using Hologic DXA systems. The difference between left and right hips was considered significant if it exceeded the least significant change (LSC) for any of three hip subregions (total hip, femoral neck, trochanter). The number of women with osteoporosis in both hips, the left hip only, or the right hip only was determined by lowest T-score from total hip, femoral neck, or trochanter.
RESULTS: Despite high left-right correlations of subregion BMD, significant left-right differences in BMD were common: the difference exceeded the LSC for 47% of women at total hip, 31% at femoral neck, and 56% at trochanter. Left-right differences in BMD that exceeded the LSC affected the percent agreement of left-right hip classification: for all women irrespective of spine status, there was 77% classification (diagnostic) agreement in hip pairs in which the left-right hip BMD difference exceeded the LSC versus 87% agreement in which LSC was not exceeded (significant difference in proportions, P<0.0001). The greatest risk of different classification would occur in women with normal spines as the diagnosis might be determined by hip T-scores. Using L1-4 lumbar spine T-scores, 1229 women were normal at the spine. Twenty-four (2%) were osteoporotic at both hips. However, 12 women (1%) were osteoporotic only in the left hip (significantly different from zero, P<0.001) and 11 (1%) only in the right hip (P<0.001); of these 23 women, the difference in BMD between the osteoporotic hip and the contralateral hip exceeded the LSC in 16 (70% of those with osteoporosis in only one hip). Using L1-4 lumbar spine T-scores, 1159 women were osteopenic at the spine. Of these, 126 (11%) were osteoporotic at both hips, 54 (5%) only in the left hip (P<0.001), and 42 (4%) only in the right hip (P<0.001); of these 96 women, the difference in BMD between the osteoporotic hip and the contralateral hip exceeded the LSC in 56 (58% of those with osteoporosis in only one hip).
CONCLUSIONS: A statistically significant number of women with osteoporosis are potentially classified differently when scanning only one hip as a result of the high prevalence of left-right differences in BMD. Although the percentages are low, the total number of women affected may be large. From a public health perspective, the practice of scanning both hips could potentially identify more women with osteoporosis and may help prevent future hip fractures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17019523     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-006-0192-0

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


  18 in total

1.  An investigation of the diagnostic value of bilateral femoral neck bone mineral density measurements.

Authors:  G W Petley; P A Taylor; A J Murrills; E Dennison; G Pearson; C Cooper
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Comparison and investigation of bone mineral density in opposing femora by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  J Lilley; B G Walters; D A Heath; Z Drolc
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 4.507

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

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

Review 4.  Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser       Date:  1994

5.  Bone mass in lifetime tennis athletes.

Authors:  A L Huddleston; D Rockwell; D N Kulund; R B Harrison
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1980-09-05       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Right and left proximal femur analyses: is there a need to do both?

Authors:  S L Bonnick; D L Nichols; C F Sanborn; S G Payne; S M Moen; C J Heiss
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  The diagnostic role of dual femur bone density measurement in low-impact fractures.

Authors:  Joseph C H Wong; Louise McEwan; Naomi Lee; Matthew R Griffiths; Nicholas A Pocock
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-04-01       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Changes in bone mineral content and density after stroke.

Authors:  R C Hamdy; G Krishnaswamy; V Cancellaro; K Whalen; L Harvill
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 2.159

9.  Forearm bone loss in hemiplegia: a model for the study of immobilization osteoporosis.

Authors:  R L Prince; R I Price; S Ho
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Is there a difference between right and left femoral bone density?

Authors:  A D Rao; S Reddy; D S Rao
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  13 in total

1.  Asymmetrical hip bone density in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Rebecca D Larson; Lesley J White
Journal:  Int J MS Care       Date:  2011

2.  The assessment of bone mineral content and density of the lumbar spine and proximal femur in US submariners.

Authors:  H G Gasier; L M Hughes; C R Young; A M Richardson; A R Richardson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Underestimated fracture probability in patients with unilateral hip osteoarthritis as calculated by FRAX.

Authors:  Nithya Setty; Meryl S Leboff; Thomas S Thornhill; Giulia Rinaldi; Julie Glowacki
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.617

4.  Novel press-fit technique of patellar bone plug in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is comparable to interference screw fixation.

Authors:  Janosch Häberli; Maximilian Heilgemeir; Sebastian Valet; Ameet Aiyangar; Tom Overes; Philipp Henle; Stefan Eggli
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-08-30       Impact factor: 2.928

5.  Left-right differences in the proximal femur's strength of post-menopausal women: a multicentric finite element study.

Authors:  F Taddei; C Falcinelli; L Balistreri; P Henys; F Baruffaldi; S Sigurdsson; V Gudnason; T B Harris; R Dietzel; G Armbrecht; S Boutroy; E Schileo
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  The prevalence of significant left-right hip bone mineral density differences among black and white women.

Authors:  J D Alele; D L Kamen; K L Hermayer; J Fernandes; J Soule; M Ebeling; T C Hulsey
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Association of incident hip fracture with the estimated femoral strength by finite element analysis of DXA scans in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) study.

Authors:  L Yang; N Parimi; E S Orwoll; D M Black; J T Schousboe; R Eastell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Differences in bone mineral density between the right and left hips in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Hyun Jung Hwang; Si Young Park; Soon Hyuck Lee; Seung Bum Han; Kyung Han Ro
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Prevalence and Risk Factors of Discordance between Left- and Right-Hip Bone Mineral Density Using DXA.

Authors:  Aziza Mounach; Asmaa Rezqi; Imad Ghozlani; Lahsen Achemlal; Ahmed Bezza; Abdellah El Maghraoui
Journal:  ISRN Rheumatol       Date:  2012-06-17

10.  Prediction of incident hip fracture with the estimated femoral strength by finite element analysis of DXA Scans in the study of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  Lang Yang; Lisa Palermo; Dennis M Black; Richard Eastell
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 6.741

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.