Kara L Holloway-Kew1, Amelia Betson2, Pamela G Rufus-Membere2, James Gaston2, Adolfo Diez-Perez3, Mark A Kotowicz4, Julie A Pasco5. 1. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. Electronic address: k.holloway@deakin.edu.au. 2. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Hospital del Mar-IMIM, Autonomous University of Barcelona and CIBERFES, Instituto Carlos III, Spain. 4. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Department of Medicine-Western Health, The University of Melbourne, St Albans, Australia; Barwon Health, Geelong, Australia. 5. Deakin University, Geelong, Australia; Department of Medicine-Western Health, The University of Melbourne, St Albans, Australia; Barwon Health, Geelong, Australia; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Prahran, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at increased fracture risk, with bone mineral density (BMD) measurements underestimating risk. Impact microindentation (IMI), a technique that measures bone microindentation distances, expressed as bone material strength index (BMSi), may improve fracture risk estimation in individuals with T2DM. This study describes the relationship between BMSi and glycaemia status in men and makes a comparison with bone measures from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Participants were 340 men aged 33-96 yr from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Impaired fasting glucose (IFG) was defined using fasting plasma glucose (FPG) between 5.5 and 6.9 mmol/L. Diabetes was defined as FPG ≥ 7.0 mmol/L, use of antihyperglycemic medication and/or self-report. Two participants with type 1 diabetes were excluded. BMSi was measured using an OsteoProbe. Femoral neck (FNBMD) and lumbar spine (LSBMD) were measured using DXA (Lunar Prodigy) and trabecular bone score (TBS) was calculated (TBS iNsight Version 2.2). Using linear regression techniques, the relationship between glycaemia status and BMSi was evaluated, adjusting for other potential confounders (including lifestyle factors, clinical measurements and FNBMD). Glycaemia status was also considered as a binary variable (T2DM vs normoglycaemia and IFG). RESULTS: There were 234 (68.8%) men with normoglycaemia, 59 (17.4%) with IFG and 47 (13.8%) with diabetes. When considering glycaemia status as a binary variable, men with T2DM had lower mean BMSi compared to those without T2DM (normoglycaemia and IFG combined) (79.8; 95%CI 77.0-82.6 vs 83.0; 82.2-83.8 p = 0.043) and this difference in BMSi was independent of FNBMD. No differences were observed for either FNBMD or LSBMD; however, TBS was lower (1.177; 1.121-1.233 vs 1.256; 1.240-1.272, p = 0.015, independent of FNBMD). For glycaemia status considered in three groups, there were no differences in mean BMSi values between men with normoglycaemia, IFG and T2DM (82.9 (95%CI 82.0-83.8), 83.5 (81.8-85.2) and 79.8 (77.0-82.6), respectively; ANCOVA, p = 0.104). CONCLUSIONS: Measures reflecting bone material properties and microarchitecture (BMSi and TBS) might be better than measures of bone mass (BMD) in identifying individuals with T2DM at risk of fracture.
BACKGROUND: Individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at increased fracture risk, with bone mineral density (BMD) measurements underestimating risk. Impact microindentation (IMI), a technique that measures bone microindentation distances, expressed as bone material strength index (BMSi), may improve fracture risk estimation in individuals with T2DM. This study describes the relationship between BMSi and glycaemia status in men and makes a comparison with bone measures from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). MATERIAL AND METHODS:Participants were 340 men aged 33-96 yr from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Impaired fasting glucose (IFG) was defined using fasting plasma glucose (FPG) between 5.5 and 6.9 mmol/L. Diabetes was defined as FPG ≥ 7.0 mmol/L, use of antihyperglycemic medication and/or self-report. Two participants with type 1 diabetes were excluded. BMSi was measured using an OsteoProbe. Femoral neck (FNBMD) and lumbar spine (LSBMD) were measured using DXA (Lunar Prodigy) and trabecular bone score (TBS) was calculated (TBS iNsight Version 2.2). Using linear regression techniques, the relationship between glycaemia status and BMSi was evaluated, adjusting for other potential confounders (including lifestyle factors, clinical measurements and FNBMD). Glycaemia status was also considered as a binary variable (T2DM vs normoglycaemia and IFG). RESULTS: There were 234 (68.8%) men with normoglycaemia, 59 (17.4%) with IFG and 47 (13.8%) with diabetes. When considering glycaemia status as a binary variable, men with T2DM had lower mean BMSi compared to those without T2DM (normoglycaemia and IFG combined) (79.8; 95%CI 77.0-82.6 vs 83.0; 82.2-83.8 p = 0.043) and this difference in BMSi was independent of FNBMD. No differences were observed for either FNBMD or LSBMD; however, TBS was lower (1.177; 1.121-1.233 vs 1.256; 1.240-1.272, p = 0.015, independent of FNBMD). For glycaemia status considered in three groups, there were no differences in mean BMSi values between men with normoglycaemia, IFG and T2DM (82.9 (95%CI 82.0-83.8), 83.5 (81.8-85.2) and 79.8 (77.0-82.6), respectively; ANCOVA, p = 0.104). CONCLUSIONS: Measures reflecting bone material properties and microarchitecture (BMSi and TBS) might be better than measures of bone mass (BMD) in identifying individuals with T2DM at risk of fracture.
Authors: Unni Syversen; Mats Peder Mosti; Ida Maria Mynarek; Trude Seselie Jahr Vedal; Kristin Aasarød; Trude Basso; Janne E Reseland; Per Medbøe Thorsby; Bjorn O Asvold; Erik Fink Eriksen; Astrid Kamilla Stunes Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2021-08-13 Impact factor: 3.335