Literature DB >> 27307159

[Diagnostics in osteology].

F Jakob1, F Genest2, L Seefried2, E Tsourdi3, C Lapa4, L C Hofbauer3.   

Abstract

Clinical diagnostics in metabolic bone diseases cover a broad spectrum of conventional and state of the art methods ranging from the medical history and clinical examination to molecular imaging. Patient treatment is carried out in an interdisciplinary team due to the multiple interactions of bone with other organ systems. Diagnosis of osteoporosis is supported by high level national guidelines. A paradigm shift concerning the clinical relevance of bone mineral density measurement renders this now to be a strong risk factor rather than a diagnostic parameter, while strengthening the value of other clinical factors for risk assessment. The impact of parameters for muscle mass, structure and function is steadily increasing in all age groups. In order to identify underlying diseases that influence bone metabolism a panel of general laboratory diagnostic parameters is recommended. Markers for bone formation and resorption and specific parameters for the regulation of calcium and phosphate metabolism should be evaluated by specialists because they require diligence in preanalytics and experience in interpretation. Genetic diagnosis is well established for rare bone diseases while diagnostic panels are not yet available for routine diagnostics in polygenetic diseases such as osteoporosis. Conventional radiology is still very important to identify, e. g. fractures, osteolytic and osteoblastic lesions and extraosseous calcifications; however tomography-based methods which combine, e. g. scintigraphy or positron emission technologies with anatomical imaging are of increasing significance. Clinical diagnostics in osteology require profound knowledge and are subject to a dynamic evolution.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone biopsy; Bone density; Human genetics; Positron emission tomography; Single photon emission computed tomography

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27307159     DOI: 10.1007/s00108-016-0081-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Internist (Berl)        ISSN: 0020-9554            Impact factor:   0.743


  19 in total

Review 1.  Imaging of bone metastasis: An update.

Authors:  Gerard J O'Sullivan; Fiona L Carty; Carmel G Cronin
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2015-08-28

Review 2.  Bone remodeling markers and bone metastases: From cancer research to clinical implications.

Authors:  Arlindo Ferreira; Irina Alho; Sandra Casimiro; Luís Costa
Journal:  Bonekey Rep       Date:  2015-04-22

3.  Diagnostic findings and treatment in a 51-year-old woman with oncogenic osteomalacia.

Authors:  C Lapa; F Genest; A K Buck; K Herrmann; W Kenn; M Rudert; F Jakob; L Seefried
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 4.  Hypophosphatasia - aetiology, nosology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Michael P Whyte
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 43.330

Review 5.  The changing face of hypophosphatemic disorders in the FGF-23 era.

Authors:  Janet Y Lee; Erik A Imel
Journal:  Pediatr Endocrinol Rev       Date:  2013-06

6.  Acute vertebral collapse due to osteoporosis or malignancy: appearance on unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MR images.

Authors:  C A Cuénod; J D Laredo; S Chevret; B Hamze; J F Naouri; X Chapaux; J M Bondeville; J M Tubiana
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  [Metabolic bone diseases].

Authors:  F Jakob
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 0.743

Review 8.  Is calcaneal quantitative ultrasound useful as a prescreen stratification tool for osteoporosis?

Authors:  K Thomsen; D B Jepsen; L Matzen; A P Hermann; T Masud; J Ryg
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 9.  Recent developments in osteogenesis imperfecta.

Authors:  Joseph L Shaker; Carolyne Albert; Jessica Fritz; Gerald Harris
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2015-09-07

10.  In vivo molecular imaging of chemokine receptor CXCR4 expression in patients with advanced multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Kathrin Philipp-Abbrederis; Ken Herrmann; Stefan Knop; Margret Schottelius; Matthias Eiber; Katharina Lückerath; Elke Pietschmann; Stefan Habringer; Carlos Gerngroß; Katharina Franke; Martina Rudelius; Andreas Schirbel; Constantin Lapa; Kristina Schwamborn; Sabine Steidle; Elena Hartmann; Andreas Rosenwald; Saskia Kropf; Ambros J Beer; Christian Peschel; Hermann Einsele; Andreas K Buck; Markus Schwaiger; Katharina Götze; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Ulrich Keller
Journal:  EMBO Mol Med       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 12.137

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.