Literature DB >> 19747992

A multicentre, retrospective case-control study assessing the role of trabecular bone score (TBS) in menopausal Caucasian women with low areal bone mineral density (BMDa): Analysing the odds of vertebral fracture.

Bénédicte Rabier1, Alain Héraud, Catherine Grand-Lenoir, Renaud Winzenrieth, Didier Hans.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The trabecular bone score (TBS) is a new parameter that is determined from grey level analysis of DXA images. It relies on the mean thickness and volume fraction of trabecular bone microarchitecture. This was a preliminary case-control study to evaluate the potential diagnostic value of TBS, both alone and combined with bone mineral density (BMDa), in the assessment of vertebral fracture.
METHODS: Out of a subject pool of 441 Caucasian, postmenopausal women between the ages of 50 and 80 years, we identified 42 women with osteoporosis-related vertebral fractures, and compared them with 126 age-matched women without any fractures (1 case: 3 controls). Primary outcomes were BMDa and TBS. Inter-group comparisons were undertaken using Student's t-tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests for parametric and non-parametric data, respectively. Odds ratios for vertebral fracture were calculated for each incremental one standard deviation decrease in BMDa and TBS, and areas under the receiver operating curve (AUC) calculated and sensitivity analysis were conducted to compare BMDa alone, TBS alone, and the combination of BMDa and TBS. Subgroup analyses were performed specifically for women with osteopenia, and for women with T-score-defined osteoporosis.
RESULTS: Across all subjects (n=42, 126) weight and body mass index were greater and BMDa and TBS both less in women with fractures. The odds of vertebral fracture were 3.20 (95% CI, 2.01-5.08) for each incremental decrease in TBS, 1.95 (1.34-2.84) for BMDa, and 3.62 (2.32-5.65) for BMDa + TBS combined. The AUC was greater for TBS than for BMDa (0.746 vs. 0.662, p=0.011). At iso-specificity (61.9%) or iso-sensitivity (61.9%) for both BMDa and TBS, TBS + BMDa sensitivity or specificity was 19.1% or 16.7% greater than for either BMDa or TBS alone. Among subjects with osteoporosis (n=11, 40) both BMDa (p=0.0008) and TBS (p=0.0001) were lower in subjects with fractures, and both OR and AUC (p=0.013) for BMDa + TBS were greater than for BMDa alone (OR=4.04 [2.35-6.92] vs. 2.43 [1.49-3.95]; AUC=0.835 [0.755-0.897] vs. 0.718 [0.627-0.797], p=0.013). Among subjects with osteopenia, TBS was lower in women with fractures (p=0.0296), but BMDa was not (p=0.75). Similarly, the OR for TBS was statistically greater than 1.00 (2.82, 1.27-6.26), but not for BMDa (1.12, 0.56-2.22), as was the AUC (p=0.035), but there was no statistical difference in specificity (p=0.357) or sensitivity (p=0.678).
CONCLUSIONS: The trabecular bone score warrants further study as to whether it has any clinical application in osteoporosis detection and the evaluation of fracture risk. Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19747992     DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2009.06.032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  50 in total

Review 1.  Utility of the trabecular bone score (TBS) in secondary osteoporosis.

Authors:  Fabio M Ulivieri; Barbara C Silva; Francesco Sardanelli; Didier Hans; John P Bilezikian; Renata Caudarella
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 3.633

2.  THE MEASUREMENT OF BONE QUALITY USING GRAY LEVEL CO-OCCURRENCE MATRIX TEXTURAL FEATURES.

Authors:  Mukul Shirvaikar; Ning Huang; Xuanliang Neil Dong
Journal:  J Med Imaging Health Inform       Date:  2016-10

3.  Measurement of subregional vertebral bone mineral density in vitro using lateral projection dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: validation with peripheral quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  Andrew M Briggs; Egon Perilli; Ian H Parkinson; Susan Kantor; Tim V Wrigley; Nicola L Fazzalari; John D Wark
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 2.626

4.  The predictive value of trabecular bone score (TBS) on whole lumbar vertebrae mechanics: an ex vivo study.

Authors:  J P Roux; J Wegrzyn; S Boutroy; M L Bouxsein; D Hans; R Chapurlat
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Trabecular bone score (TBS) in postmenopausal African American women.

Authors:  J F Aloia; M Mikhail; G Usera; R Dhaliwal; S Islam
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-10-11       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Age-related normative values of trabecular bone score (TBS) for Japanese women: the Japanese Population-based Osteoporosis (JPOS) study.

Authors:  M Iki; J Tamaki; Y Sato; R Winzenrieth; S Kagamimori; Y Kagawa; H Yoneshima
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-08-23       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Effects of Teriparatide, Denosumab, or Both on Spine Trabecular Microarchitecture in DATA-Switch: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Joy N Tsai; Linda A Jiang; Hang Lee; Didier Hans; Benjamin Z Leder
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 2.617

8.  The trabecular bone score is associated with bone mineral density, markers of bone turnover and prevalent fracture in patients with end stage kidney disease.

Authors:  J Aleksova; S Kurniawan; G J Elder
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Trabecular bone score (TBS)--a novel method to evaluate bone microarchitectural texture in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism.

Authors:  Barbara Campolina Silva; Stephanie Boutroy; Chiyuan Zhang; Donald Jay McMahon; Bin Zhou; Ji Wang; Julia Udesky; Serge Cremers; Marta Sarquis; Xiang-Dong Edward Guo; Didier Hans; John Paul Bilezikian
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 5.958

10.  Trabecular bone score improves fracture risk prediction in non-osteoporotic women: the OFELY study.

Authors:  S Boutroy; D Hans; E Sornay-Rendu; N Vilayphiou; R Winzenrieth; R Chapurlat
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-10-16       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.