Literature DB >> 3395382

Radial and spinal bone mineral density in a patient population.

R B Mazess1, H S Barden, M Ettinger.   

Abstract

Density of the radius (by single-photon absorptiometry) and the spine (by dual-photon absorptiometry) was measured in 281 normal young women and in a large heterogeneous group of 1,622 consecutive female patients. Both spinal and radial density were useful measurements when performed on patients with medical indications; spine and radius densities in these patients averaged 10-20% below those of age-matched controls. However, patients younger than 60 years of age had deficits of spine density that were twice as large as those in the radius, and twice as many of these patients had spinal osteopenia, compared with those with radial osteopenia. After age 70, loss of density in the radius approximated that in the spine and the prevalence of osteopenia was similar at both sites. The poorer sensitivity of the radius measurement reflected the fact that it did not predict spine density. The standard error of the estimate was 0.12 gm/cm2 in normal subjects and 0.15 gm/cm2 in patients. At any given radial density, the spinal density of patients averaged 0.18 gm/cm2 (15-20%) below that in normal subjects. Predictions of spinal density from body weight were as accurate as predictions from radial density. Preferential spinal osteopenia occurring without radial osteopenia precluded radial densitometry as a screening method for individuals with osteoporosis before age 60. However, measurement of the radius was more effective than body weight for defining groups at risk, even though the radius did not reliably predict individual spine density. A radius shaft density less than 0.55 gm/cm2 occurring with a body weight less than 55 kg was associated with a high prevalence of spinal osteopenia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3395382     DOI: 10.1002/art.1780310710

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Rheum        ISSN: 0004-3591


  7 in total

1.  Fracture risk: a role for compact bone.

Authors:  R B Mazess
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 4.333

2.  Comparison between radial bone mineral density measured by single photon absorptiometry and histomorphometric bone mass parameters measured on iliac crest biopsies.

Authors:  F Duboeuf; D Uebelhart; G Boivin; C Edouard; P D Delmas; P J Meunier
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  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

4.  Bone mineral density and fracture in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  M Meltzer; H J Lessig; J A Siegel
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Classification of osteoporosis in the elderly is dependent on site-specific analysis.

Authors:  S L Greenspan; L Maitland-Ramsey; E Myers
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Differential effects of glucocorticoids on cortical appendicular and cortical vertebral bone mineral content.

Authors:  R F Laan; W C Buijs; L J van Erning; J A Lemmens; F H Corstens; S H Ruijs; L B van de Putte; P L van Riel
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  WHOLE BODY AND REGIONAL BONE MINERAL CONTENT AND DENSITY IN WOMEN AGED 20-75 YEARS.

Authors:  M A Boyanov
Journal:  Acta Endocrinol (Buchar)       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 0.877

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.