Literature DB >> 17216132

A nomogram for predicting osteoporosis risk based on age, weight and quantitative ultrasound measurement.

C Pongchaiyakul1, S Panichkul, T Songpatanasilp, T V Nguyen.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Quantitative ultrasound measurement (QUS) or clinical risk index alone are not reliable tools for the identification of women with osteoporosis. This study examined the prognostic value of combined QUS and clinical risk index for predicting osteoporosis risk in Thai women.
METHODS: The study was designed as a cross-sectional investigation with 300 women of Thai background, aged between 38 and 85 years (mean age: 58). Femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by DXA (Hologic QDR-4500; Bedford, MA, USA). A femoral neck BMD T-scores <or= -2.5 was defined as "osteoporosis"; otherwise, "non-osteoporosis". QUS was measured by Achilles+ (GE Lunar, Madison, WI, USA) and converted to T-score. Three models for predicting osteoporosis were considered: model I included age, weight and QUS, model II included age and weight, and model III included only QUS. The prognostic performance among the models was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
RESULTS: The prevalence of osteoporosis was 12.7% (n=38/300) by femoral neck BMD. Age, weight and QUS were each significantly associated with osteoporosis risk. The AUC+/-SE value for model I was 0.86 +/- 0.03, which was significantly higher (p=0.02) than that for model II (AUC = 0.80 +/- 0.04) or model III (AUC = 0.79 +/- 0.04). Based on the estimated parameters of model I, a nomogram was constructed for predicting osteoporosis.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the combination of QUS and age and weight could significantly improve the prognosis of osteoporosis in Asian women, and that the nomogram can assist primary care physicians in the identification of high-risk women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17216132     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-006-0279-7

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


  38 in total

1.  Temperature dependency of quantitative ultrasound.

Authors:  N A Pocock; A Babichev; N Culton; K Graney; J Rooney; D Bell; J Chu
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 2.  Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors.

Authors:  F E Harrell; K L Lee; D B Mark
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1996-02-28       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Factors affecting the in vivo precision of broad-band ultrasonic attenuation.

Authors:  W D Evans; E A Jones; G M Owen
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Assessment of a new quantitative ultrasound calcaneus measurement: precision and discrimination of hip fractures in elderly women compared with dual X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  Y Q He; B Fan; D Hans; J Li; C Y Wu; C F Njeh; S Zhao; Y Lu; E Tsuda-Futami; T Fuerst; H K Genant
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Identification of high-risk individuals for hip fracture: a 14-year prospective study.

Authors:  Nguyen D Nguyen; Chatlert Pongchaiyakul; Jacqueline R Center; John A Eisman; Tuan V Nguyen
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2005-05-31       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Limited utility of clinical indices for the prediction of symptomatic fracture risk in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Tuan V Nguyen; Jacqueline R Center; Nicholas A Pocock; John A Eisman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-10-30       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 7.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

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

8.  Discrimination of patients with and without vertebral fractures as measured by ultrasound and DXA osteodensitometry.

Authors:  J Schneider; B Bundschuh; C Späth; C Landkammer; H Müller; U Sommer; M Götz; P Nawroth; P Heilmann; C Kasperk
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2003-11-06       Impact factor: 4.333

9.  How well do radiographic absorptiometry and quantitative ultrasound predict osteoporosis at spine or hip? A cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  K Lippuner; G Fuchs; A G Ruetsche; R Perrelet; J P Casez; I Neto
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  Tibial ultrasound velocity in women with wrist fracture.

Authors:  Nadine Hollevoet; René Verdonk; Stefan Goemaere; Georges Van Maele
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  9 in total

1.  A correlation exists between subchondral bone mineral density of the distal radius and systemic bone mineral density.

Authors:  Seung Hwan Rhee; Goo Hyun Baek
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Dynamic bone quality: a noninvasive measure of bone's biomechanical property in osteoporosis.

Authors:  Amit Bhattacharya; Nelson B Watts; Kermit Davis; Susan Kotowski; Rakesh Shukla; Alok Kumar Dwivedi; Robert Coleman
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2010-03-29       Impact factor: 2.617

3.  Individualization of osteoporosis risk.

Authors:  T V Nguyen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-07-05       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  A new nomogram score for predicting surgery-related pressure ulcers in cardiovascular surgical patients.

Authors:  Cai-Xia Lu; Hong-Lin Chen; Wang-Qin Shen; Li-Ping Feng
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  Identification of combined biomarkers for predicting the risk of osteoporosis using machine learning.

Authors:  Zhenlong Zheng; Xianglan Zhang; Bong-Kyeong Oh; Ki-Yeol Kim
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 5.955

6.  Development of a Nomogram for Predicting Very Low Bone Mineral Density (T-Scores <-3) in the Chinese Population.

Authors:  Yong-Fang Li; Qin-Yi Wang; Lu-Lu Xu; Chun Yue; Li Hu; Na Ding; Yan-Yi Yang; Xiao-Li Qu; Zhi-Feng Sheng
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2022-02-04

7.  Bone health comparison in seven Asian countries using calcaneal ultrasound.

Authors:  Marlena C Kruger; Joanne M Todd; Linda M Schollum; Barbara Kuhn-Sherlock; Drew W McLean; Kim Wylie
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  The correlation between phalangeal quantitative ultrasonography and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry in women with premature ovarian failure.

Authors:  Tandip S Mann; Alison H McGregor; Rajesh Patel
Journal:  Mcgill J Med       Date:  2008-07

9.  Quantitative ultrasound does not identify patients with an inflammatory disease at risk of vertebral deformities.

Authors:  A Caroline Heijckmann; Bianca Dumitrescu; Arie C Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman; Piet Geusens; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Jolanda De Vries; Marjolein Drent; Maya S P Huijberts
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.