Literature DB >> 7621339

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the lumbar spine in German men and women: a cross-sectional study.

R Lehmann1, M Wapniarz, O Randerath, H M Kvasnicka, W John, M Reincke, S Kutnar, K Klein, B Allolio.   

Abstract

A cross-sectional, population-based study of 238 randomly selected females and 224 males with German ethnic background (aged 20-80 years) was carried out to establish lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) values, using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), for a German population. Comparison was made to the reference range provided by the manufacturer of the DXA equipment. No sex difference in peak spine BMD was found in our study (1.091 +/- 0.114 g/cm2 for males versus 1.070 +/- 0.113 g/cm2 for females, n.s.). Different patterns of bone loss could be detected in both sexes. In premenopausal women there was no significant correlation between age and BMD (y = 1.044 + 0.00047x, r = 0.03, P = 0.73) whereas reduction of female BMD at the spine was demonstrated in postmenopausal women (y = 1.189-0.0041x, r = -0.28, P = 0.01), underscoring the important role of the menopause for later manifestation of spinal osteoporosis in women. In contrast, in males we found no significant change of BMD with aging (y = 1.071-0.0007x, r = -0.08, P = 0.25). Employing commonly used exclusion criteria, BMD values of the study subjects were found mostly within the normal range of BMD. The major finding of our study was good concordance between female data of our study population and the reference data provided by the manufacturer. Clinically significant discrepancies between our data and the Hologic reference range for males could be detected. Our data on males (30-39 years of age) were up to 7% lower than those provided by the manufacturer, probably due to differences in sampling procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7621339     DOI: 10.1007/bf00301600

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  19 in total

1.  Bone mineral density in Australia compared with the United States.

Authors:  N A Pocock; J A Eisman; R B Mazess; P N Sambrook; M G Yeates; J Freund
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Ascertainment of risk factors for osteoporosis: comparison of interview data with medical record review.

Authors:  C M Beard; L J Melton; S L Cedel; L S Richelson; B L Riggs
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Apparent velocity of ultrasound (AVU) at the patella in comparison to bone mineral density at the lumbar spine in normal males and females.

Authors:  M Wapniarz; R Lehmann; N Banik; M Radwan; K Klein; B Allolio
Journal:  Bone Miner       Date:  1993-12

4.  Precision of dual X-ray absorptiometry and peripheral computed tomography using mobile densitometry units.

Authors:  M Wapniarz; R Lehmann; O Randerath; S Baedeker; W John; K Klein; B Allolio
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Sex differences in age-related changes in vertebral body size, density and biomechanical competence in normal individuals.

Authors:  L Mosekilde; L Mosekilde
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 4.398

6.  The effects of race and body habitus on bone mineral density of the radius, hip, and spine in premenopausal women.

Authors:  Y Liel; J Edwards; J Shary; K M Spicer; L Gordon; N H Bell
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 5.958

7.  [Evaluation of the mineral content of peripheral bones (radius) by photon-absorption technique in normals as well as in patients with various types of bone diseases (author's transl)].

Authors:  H Runge; F Fengler; J Franke; W Koall
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  1980-10       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  Bone mass in an urban and a rural population: a comparative, population-based study in southern Sweden.

Authors:  P Gärdsell; O Johnell; B E Nilsson; I Sernbo
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Sensitivity of dual-photon absorptiometry in spinal osteoporosis.

Authors:  J M Pouilles; F Tremollieres; J P Louvet; B Fournie; G Morlock; C Ribot
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 4.333

10.  [Clinical significance of direct measurement of bone mineral content. 125I photon absorption measurement in 1252 cases].

Authors:  J D Ringe
Journal:  Fortschr Med       Date:  1983-02-03
View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  An update on the diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Authors:  J A Kanis
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.592

2.  Bone mineral density of the spine and femur in healthy Saudis.

Authors:  M Salleh M Ardawi; Abdulraouf A Maimany; Talal M Bahksh; Hasan A N Nasrat; Waleed A Milaat; Raja M Al-Raddadi
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-05-27       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Vertebral morphometry reference data by X-ray absorptiometry (MXA) in Iranian women.

Authors:  A Salimzadeh; M Moghaddassi; G H Alishiri; M B Owlia; L Kohan
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2006-08-29       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Reduced bone mineral density and altered bone turnover markers in patients with non-cirrhotic chronic hepatitis B or C infection.

Authors:  Ingolf Schiefke; Andreas Fach; Marcus Wiedmann; Andreas-V Aretin; Eva Schenker; Gudrun Borte; Manfred Wiese; Joachim Moessner
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-03-28       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Apparent bone mineral density estimated from DXA in healthy men and women.

Authors:  Selma Cvijetić; Mirko Korsić
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-11-20       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Bone loss in elderly men: increased endosteal bone loss and stable periosteal apposition. The prospective MINOS study.

Authors:  P Szulc; P D Delmas
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-01-26       Impact factor: 4.507

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.