Literature DB >> 3214679

The relation between forearm and vertebral mineral density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

B E Nordin1, J M Wishart, M Horowitz, A G Need, A Bridges, M Bellon.   

Abstract

Vertebral and forearm mineral density (VMD and FMD, respectively) were determined in 124 postmenopausal women with no crushed vertebrae or peripheral fractures, 51 who had sustained peripheral fractures only since the menopause, 62 with vertebral compression(s) only and 75 with both types of fracture. There was a very significant correlation between the two measurements in the whole set. The scatter could not be accounted for by methodological error but was partly accounted for by body weight, since VMD was related to body weight and FMD was not. Whatever criterion was used for the diagnosis of osteoporosis (whether fracture or density) the percentage of misclassified cases was very similar by the two methods. However, VMD was relatively more reduced than FMD in vertebral fracture cases and FMD was marginally more reduced than VMD in peripheral fracture cases. There is little to choose between vertebral and forearm density in the diagnosis of osteoporosis but vertebral densitometry is slightly superior to forearm densitometry in describing the severity of osteoporosis in vertebral fracture patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3214679     DOI: 10.1016/0169-6009(88)90004-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Miner        ISSN: 0169-6009


  13 in total

1.  Dual photon absorptiometry of lumbar spine in west European (Belgian) postmenopausal females: normal range and fracture threshold.

Authors:  J Y Reginster; D Denis; R Deroisy; A Albert; N Sarlet; J Collette; P Franchimont
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 2.  Measurement of bone mineral density.

Authors:  C Hassager; C Christiansen
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Which bone to measure?

Authors:  A G Need; B E Nordin
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Effect of osteoarthritis in the lumbar spine and hip on bone mineral density and diagnosis of osteoporosis in elderly men and women.

Authors:  G Liu; M Peacock; O Eilam; G Dorulla; E Braunstein; C C Johnston
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Malabsorption of calcium in corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis.

Authors:  H A Morris; A G Need; P D O'Loughlin; M Horowitz; A Bridges; B E Nordin
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Does a single local absorptiometric bone measurement indicate the overall skeletal status? Implications for osteoporosis and osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  A Gotfredsen; B J Riis; C Christiansen; P Rødbro
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 7.  When bone mass fails to predict bone failure.

Authors:  S M Ott
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 4.333

8.  Distal radius fracture is an early sign of general osteoporosis: bone mass measurements in a population-based study.

Authors:  H Mallmin; S Ljunghall
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Fracture of the distal forearm as a forecaster of subsequent hip fracture: a population-based cohort study with 24 years of follow-up.

Authors:  H Mallmin; S Ljunghall; I Persson; T Naessén; U B Krusemo; R Bergström
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 4.333

10.  The impact of measurement errors on the diagnostic value of bone mass measurements: theoretical considerations.

Authors:  C Hassager; S B Jensen; A Gotfredsen; C Christiansen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.