Literature DB >> 19452122

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

J D Alele1, D L Kamen, K L Hermayer, J Fernandes, J Soule, M Ebeling, T C Hulsey.   

Abstract

SUMMARY: In a cross-sectional retrospective study, we examined the prevalence of significant opposite hip bone mineral density difference among white and black women. Left-right hip bone mineral density difference was a common finding in both races, raising the possibility that osteoporosis can be missed if only one hip is imaged.
INTRODUCTION: We examined the prevalence of significant left-right hip bone mineral density (BMD) difference among black and white female subjects and its implications on the diagnosis of osteoporosis.
METHODS: This was a retrospective review of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) data in black and white subjects age 50 years and older. One thousand four hundred seventy-seven scans obtained using a GE Lunar Prodigy scanner in dual hip mode were analyzed (24% black, 76% white). Significant left-right hip BMD difference was considered present when the subregion least significant change (LSC) was exceeded. Its prevalence was determined, along with consequences on the diagnosis of osteoporosis.
RESULTS: Significant differences in BMD were common in both races; the LSC was exceeded in 47% of the patients at the total hip, 37% at the femoral neck, and 53% at the trochanter. Diagnostic agreement was lower when the LSC was exceeded than when it was not. The LSC was exceeded in a statistically significant number of black and white patients with normal or osteopenic spines and unilateral hip osteoporosis.
CONCLUSIONS: Significant left-right hip BMD difference is a common finding among black and white women and can result in osteoporosis being missed if only one hip is imaged.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19452122     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-009-0915-0

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


  17 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

Review 3.  Noninvasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: state of the art.

Authors:  H K Genant; K Engelke; T Fuerst; C C Glüer; S Grampp; S T Harris; M Jergas; T Lang; Y Lu; S Majumdar; A Mathur; M Takada
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 6.741

4.  Standardization of femur BMD.

Authors:  J Hanson
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  The diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Authors:  J A Kanis; L J Melton; C Christiansen; C C Johnston; N Khaltaev
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 6.741

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.  Population-based study of survival after osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  C Cooper; E J Atkinson; S J Jacobsen; W M O'Fallon; L J Melton
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1993-05-01       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  BMD at multiple sites and risk of fracture of multiple types: long-term results from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures.

Authors:  Katie L Stone; Dana G Seeley; Li-Yung Lui; Jane A Cauley; Kristine Ensrud; Warren S Browner; Michael C Nevitt; Steven R Cummings
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  D Marshall; O Johnell; H Wedel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18
View more
  4 in total

1.  Volumetric quantitative computed tomography measurement precision for volumes and densities of tarsal and metatarsal bones.

Authors:  Paul K Commean; Jared A Kennedy; Karen A Bahow; Charles F Hildebolt; Lu Liu; Kirk E Smith; Mary K Hastings; Tao Ju; Fred W Prior; David R Sinacore
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2011-07-01       Impact factor: 2.617

2.  Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of human metatarsals: precision, least significant change and association to ex vivo fracture force.

Authors:  Kathryn L Bohnert; David J Gutekunst; Charles F Hildebolt; David R Sinacore
Journal:  Foot (Edinb)       Date:  2013-05-31

3.  SIDE TO SIDE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DOMINANT AND NON-DOMINANT ARM'S BONE DENSITY AND ISOMETRIC HANDGRIP STRENGTH IN MALES AND FEMALES AGED 40-65 YEARS OLD.

Authors:  Ermira Krasniqi; Mynyr Koni; Antigona Kabashi; Abedin Bahtiri; Selda Gjeli; Arben Boshnjaku
Journal:  Mater Sociomed       Date:  2016-10-17

4.  Screening Post-menopausal Women for Bone Mineral Level by Bioelectrical Impedance Spectroscopy of Dominant Arm.

Authors:  Nermin Öztürk; Esin Ozturk-Isik; Yekta Ülgen
Journal:  J Electr Bioimpedance       Date:  2018-12-19
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.