Literature DB >> 23344258

The discriminatory capacity of BMD measurements by DXA and dual X-ray and laser (DXL) at the calcaneus including clinical risk factors for detecting patients with vertebral fractures.

C Muschitz1, H P Dimai, R Kocijan, A Kaider, A Zendeli, F Kühne, A Trubrich, S Lung, R Waneck, H Resch.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Osteoporotic fracture risk depends on bone mineral density (BMD) and clinical risk factors (CRF). Five hundred and eighty-eight untreated female and male outpatient subjects were evaluated, 160 with vertebral fractures. BMD was measured both by using calcaneal dual X-ray and laser (DXL) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and CRF were evaluated. Detection frequencies for different BMD methods with or without CRF are presented.
INTRODUCTION: Osteoporotic fracture risk depends on bone mineral density and clinical risk factors. DXA of the spine/hip is considered a gold standard for BMD assessment, but due to degenerative conditions, particularly among the older population, assessment of BMD at the lumbar spine has been shown to be of limited significance. Portable calcaneal dual X-ray technology and laser can be an easily obtainable alternative.
METHODS: Vertebral fractures were evaluated in a baseline analysis of 588 females and males (median age 64.4, range 17.6-93.1 years), comparing BMD measurements by using DXL and DXA and CRF with/without BMD. One hundred and sixty subjects had radiological verified vertebral fractures. Area under receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROCC) and univariate and multiple logistic regressions were calculated.
RESULTS: AUROCC for detection of vertebral fractures was comparable for DXL at calcaneus and DXA at femoral neck (DXL 0.665 and DXA 0.670). Odds ratio for prevalent vertebral fracture was generally weak for DXA femoral neck (0.613) and DXL (0.521). Univariate logistic regression among CRF without BMD revealed age, prevalent fragility fracture, and body mass index significantly associated with prevalent vertebral fracture (AUROCC = 0.805). Combining BMD and CRF, a prognostic improvement in case of DXA at femoral neck (AUROCC 0.869, p = 0.02), DXL at calcaneus (AUROCC 0.869, p = 0.059), and DXA at total hip (AUROCC 0.861, p = 0.06) was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: DXL was similarly sensitive compared with DXA for identification of subjects with vertebral fragility fractures, and combination of CRF with BMD by DXL or DXA further increased the discriminatory capacity for detection of patients susceptible to vertebral fracture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23344258     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-013-2266-0

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


  37 in total

1.  Underdiagnosis of vertebral fractures is a worldwide problem: the IMPACT study.

Authors:  Pierre D Delmas; Lex van de Langerijt; Nelson B Watts; Richard Eastell; Harry Genant; Andreas Grauer; David L Cahall
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2004-12-06       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Comprehensive osteoporosis management with easy access to bone mineral density measurements.

Authors:  Ragnar Kullenberg; Bengt Hanson; Rolf Sandberg; Hans Dahlberg
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Prevalent vertebral deformities predict increased mortality and increased fracture rate in both men and women: a 10-year population-based study of 598 individuals from the Swedish cohort in the European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  R Hasserius; M K Karlsson; B E Nilsson; I Redlund-Johnell; O Johnell
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  The impact of the use of multiple risk indicators for fracture on case-finding strategies: a mathematical approach.

Authors:  Chris De Laet; Anders Odén; Helena Johansson; Olof Johnell; Bengt Jönsson; John A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-07-06       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Prevalence of vertebral fracture in elderly men and women with osteopenia.

Authors:  Christian Muschitz; Janina Patsch; Elisabeth Buchinger; Elise Edlmayr; Günther Nirnberger; Vasilis Evdokimidis; Reinhart Waneck; Peter Pietschmann; Heinrich Resch
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.704

6.  FRAX and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK.

Authors:  J A Kanis; O Johnell; A Oden; H Johansson; E McCloskey
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W Browner; J Cauley; K Ensrud; H K Genant; L Palermo; J Scott; T M Vogt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-01-09       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 8.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

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

9.  Axial and appendicular bone density predict fractures in older women.

Authors:  D M Black; S R Cummings; H K Genant; M C Nevitt; L Palermo; W Browner
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Dual X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus: comparison with quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  Giuseppe Martini; Roberto Valenti; Luigi Gennari; Stefania Salvadori; Beatrice Galli; Ranuccio Nuti
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.963

View more
  7 in total

1.  MRI-based vertebral bone quality score effectively reflects bone quality in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compressive fractures.

Authors:  Ruoyao Li; Yongjie Yin; Wei Ji; Xiaoliang Wu; Hui Jiang; Jianting Chen; Qingan Zhu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 2.721

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.  Less strict intervention thresholds for the FRAX and TBS-adjusted FRAX predict clinical fractures in osteopenic postmenopausal women with no prior fractures.

Authors:  Martin Kužma; Didier Hans; Tomáš Koller; Eva Némethová; Peter Jackuliak; Zdenko Killinger; Heinrich Resch; Juraj Payer
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 2.626

4.  Bone structure assessed by HR-pQCT, TBS and DXL in adult patients with different types of osteogenesis imperfecta.

Authors:  R Kocijan; C Muschitz; J Haschka; D Hans; A Nia; A Geroldinger; M Ardelt; R Wakolbinger; H Resch
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  A pilot study of change in fracture risk in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Jaikitry Rawal; Mark J W McPhail; Gamumu Ratnayake; Pearl Chan; John Moxham; Stephen D R Harridge; Nicholas Hart; Hugh E Montgomery; Zudin A Puthucheary
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  Bone - a casualty of ICU survival?

Authors:  Karin Amrein; Astrid Fahrleitner-Pammer; Hans Peter Dimai
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 9.097

7.  Laser-Supported Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXL) Compared to Conventional Absorptiometry (DXA) and to FRAX as Tools for Fracture Risk Assessments.

Authors:  Hans Lundin; Faramarz Torabi; Maria Sääf; Lars-Erik Strender; Sven Nyren; Sven-Erik Johansson; Helena Salminen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.