J Patsch1, P Pietschmann, C Schueller-Weidekamm. 1. Abteilung für Allgemeine Radiologie und Kinderradiologie, Universitätsklinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-10, 1090, Wien, Österreich, janina.patsch@meduniwien.ac.at.
Abstract
CLINICAL ISSUE: Diabetic bone diseases are more than just osteoporosis in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM): a relatively high bone mineral density is paired with a paradoxically high risk of fragility fractures. Diabetics exhibit low bone turnover, osteocyte dysfunction, relative hypoparathyroidism and an accumulation of advanced glycation end products in the bone matrix. Besides typical insufficiency fractures, diabetics show a high risk for peripheral fractures of the lower extremities (e.g. metatarsal fractures). The correct interdisciplinary assessment of fracture risks in patients with DM is therefore a clinical challenge. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: There are two state of the art imaging methods for the quantification of fracture risks: dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and quantitative computed tomography (QCT). Radiography, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are suitable for the detection of insufficiency fractures. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS AND PERFORMANCE: Novel research imaging techniques, such as high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) provide non-invasive insights into bone microarchitecture of the peripheral skeleton. Using MR spectroscopy, bone marrow composition can be studied. Both methods have been shown to be capable of discriminating between type 2 diabetic patients with and without prevalent fragility fractures and thus bear the potential of improving the current standard of care. Currently both methods remain limited to clinical research applications. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: DXA and HR-pQCT are valid tools for the quantification of bone mineral density and assessment of fracture risk in patients with DM, especially if interpreted in the context of clinical risk factors. Radiography, CT and MRI are suitable for the detection of insufficiency fractures.
CLINICAL ISSUE: Diabetic bone diseases are more than just osteoporosis in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM): a relatively high bone mineral density is paired with a paradoxically high risk of fragility fractures. Diabetics exhibit low bone turnover, osteocyte dysfunction, relative hypoparathyroidism and an accumulation of advanced glycation end products in the bone matrix. Besides typical insufficiency fractures, diabetics show a high risk for peripheral fractures of the lower extremities (e.g. metatarsal fractures). The correct interdisciplinary assessment of fracture risks in patients with DM is therefore a clinical challenge. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: There are two state of the art imaging methods for the quantification of fracture risks: dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and quantitative computed tomography (QCT). Radiography, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are suitable for the detection of insufficiency fractures. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS AND PERFORMANCE: Novel research imaging techniques, such as high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) provide non-invasive insights into bone microarchitecture of the peripheral skeleton. Using MR spectroscopy, bone marrow composition can be studied. Both methods have been shown to be capable of discriminating between type 2 diabeticpatients with and without prevalent fragility fractures and thus bear the potential of improving the current standard of care. Currently both methods remain limited to clinical research applications. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: DXA and HR-pQCT are valid tools for the quantification of bone mineral density and assessment of fracture risk in patients with DM, especially if interpreted in the context of clinical risk factors. Radiography, CT and MRI are suitable for the detection of insufficiency fractures.
Authors: Xiaojuan Li; Daniel Kuo; Anne L Schafer; Anne Porzig; Thomas M Link; Dennis Black; Ann V Schwartz Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: R Järvinen; M Tuppurainen; A T Erkkilä; P Penttinen; M Kärkkäinen; K Salovaara; J S Jurvelin; H Kröger Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Emily K Farina; Douglas P Kiel; Ronenn Roubenoff; Ernst J Schaefer; L Adrienne Cupples; Katherine L Tucker Journal: J Nutr Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Elizabeth Shane; David Burr; Bo Abrahamsen; Robert A Adler; Thomas D Brown; Angela M Cheung; Felicia Cosman; Jeffrey R Curtis; Richard Dell; David W Dempster; Peter R Ebeling; Thomas A Einhorn; Harry K Genant; Piet Geusens; Klaus Klaushofer; Joseph M Lane; Fergus McKiernan; Ross McKinney; Alvin Ng; Jeri Nieves; Regis O'Keefe; Socrates Papapoulos; Tet Sen Howe; Marjolein C H van der Meulen; Robert S Weinstein; Michael P Whyte Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Janina M Patsch; Xiaojuan Li; Thomas Baum; Samuel P Yap; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Ann V Schwartz; Thomas M Link Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 6.741