L Ferrar1, C Roux, D Felsenberg, C-C Glüer, R Eastell. 1. The National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Disease at University of Sheffield and Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK. L.Ferrar@sheffield.ac.uk
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) with densitometric devices uses less radiation than spinal radiography. We assessed risk of new vertebral fracture (VF) in women with baseline fracture identified on VFA using algorithm-based qualitative diagnosis. Women with VF had significantly greater risk of VF after 6 years compared to those without baseline fracture. INTRODUCTION: Prevalent VFs predict future fracture and are identifiable on vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) using bone densitometry devices. We have previously performed cross-sectional, but not longitudinal, VFA using the algorithm-based qualitative method (ABQ). We aimed to examine the prevalence and incidence of VF and test the association between prevalent and incident VF identified by ABQ VFA. METHODS: We used ABQ to assess vertebral images obtained at baseline and 6 years (Hologic devices) in 674 women at ages 39 to 80 years participating in the Osteoporosis and Ultrasound Study. Criteria for prevalent and incident VF were endplate fracture, with/without cortical fracture. We compared proportions (chi-squared test) and characteristics (two-sample t tests and analysis of variance) of women with and without VF and calculated odds ratios for incident VF in women with prevalent VF (logistic regression). RESULTS: Prevalent VF was identified in one premenopausal woman and 41 postmenopausal women. Incident VF was identified in 18 postmenopausal women. Odds ratios (95% CI) for incident VF in postmenopausal women with prevalent VF were 7.8 (2.8, 22.1) (unadjusted) and 4.3 (1.4, 13.7) (adjusted for age and bone mineral density, BMD). Women with prevalent or incident VF were older (P < 0.01), with lower hip BMD (P < 0.001) compared to women without VF. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based postmenopausal women had relatively low prevalence and incidence of VF analysed with the ABQ method applied to VFA. Women with prevalent fracture had a significantly greater risk of incident VF than women without prevalent fracture.
UNLABELLED: Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) with densitometric devices uses less radiation than spinal radiography. We assessed risk of new vertebral fracture (VF) in women with baseline fracture identified on VFA using algorithm-based qualitative diagnosis. Women with VF had significantly greater risk of VF after 6 years compared to those without baseline fracture. INTRODUCTION: Prevalent VFs predict future fracture and are identifiable on vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) using bone densitometry devices. We have previously performed cross-sectional, but not longitudinal, VFA using the algorithm-based qualitative method (ABQ). We aimed to examine the prevalence and incidence of VF and test the association between prevalent and incident VF identified by ABQ VFA. METHODS: We used ABQ to assess vertebral images obtained at baseline and 6 years (Hologic devices) in 674 women at ages 39 to 80 years participating in the Osteoporosis and Ultrasound Study. Criteria for prevalent and incident VF were endplate fracture, with/without cortical fracture. We compared proportions (chi-squared test) and characteristics (two-sample t tests and analysis of variance) of women with and without VF and calculated odds ratios for incident VF in women with prevalent VF (logistic regression). RESULTS: Prevalent VF was identified in one premenopausal woman and 41 postmenopausal women. Incident VF was identified in 18 postmenopausal women. Odds ratios (95% CI) for incident VF in postmenopausal women with prevalent VF were 7.8 (2.8, 22.1) (unadjusted) and 4.3 (1.4, 13.7) (adjusted for age and bone mineral density, BMD). Women with prevalent or incident VF were older (P < 0.01), with lower hip BMD (P < 0.001) compared to women without VF. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based postmenopausal women had relatively low prevalence and incidence of VF analysed with the ABQ method applied to VFA. Women with prevalent fracture had a significantly greater risk of incident VF than women without prevalent fracture.
Authors: R D Chapurlat; F Duboeuf; H O Marion-Audibert; B Kalpakçioglu; B H Mitlak; P D Delmas Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2006-06-07 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: WanWan Xu; Subashan Perera; Donna Medich; Gail Fiorito; Julie Wagner; Loretta K Berger; Susan L Greenspan Journal: Bone Date: 2010-09-24 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Tamara Vokes; Donald Bachman; Sanford Baim; Neil Binkley; Susan Broy; Lynne Ferrar; E Michael Lewiecki; Bradford Richmond; John Schousboe Journal: J Clin Densitom Date: 2006-05-12 Impact factor: 2.617
Authors: T Fuerst; C Wu; H K Genant; G von Ingersleben; Y Chen; C Johnston; M J Econs; N Binkley; T J Vokes; G Crans; B H Mitlak Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Judith Finigan; Diana M Greenfield; Aubrey Blumsohn; Rosemary A Hannon; Nicola F Peel; Guirong Jiang; Richard Eastell Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Eugene V McCloskey; Sreekanth Vasireddy; Jane Threlkeld; Joanne Eastaugh; Ailsa Parry; Nicolas Bonnet; Monique Beneton; John A Kanis; Diane Charlesworth Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Claus C Glüer; Richard Eastell; David M Reid; Dieter Felsenberg; Christian Roux; Reinhard Barkmann; Wolfram Timm; Tilo Blenk; Gabi Armbrecht; Alison Stewart; Jackie Clowes; Friederike E Thomasius; Sami Kolta Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Alexander G Bruno; Katelyn Burkhart; Brett Allaire; Dennis E Anderson; Mary L Bouxsein Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: F Cosman; J H Krege; A C Looker; J T Schousboe; B Fan; N Sarafrazi Isfahani; J A Shepherd; K D Krohn; P Steiger; K E Wilson; H K Genant Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: E Kanterewicz; E Puigoriol; J García-Barrionuevo; L del Rio; M Casellas; P Peris Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Leo Tsz Ching Chau; Zongshan Hu; Koko Shaau Yiu Ko; Gene Chi Wai Man; Kwong Hang Yeung; Ying Yeung Law; Lawrence Chun Man Lau; Ronald Man Yeung Wong; Winnie Chiu Wing Chu; Jack Chun Yiu Cheng; Sheung Wai Law Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Alexander J Rodríguez; Kevin Leow; Pawel Szulc; David Scott; Peter Ebeling; Marc Sim; Germaine Wong; Wai H Lim; John T Schousboe; Douglas P Kiel; Richard L Prince; Joshua R Lewis Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 2.692