Literature DB >> 9556141

Assessment of bone mineral at appendicular sites in females with fractures of the proximal femur.

P Augat1, B Fan, N E Lane, T F Lang, P LeHir, Y Lu, M Uffmann, H K Genant.   

Abstract

The prediction of hip fractures by measurements at remote sites or the improvement of predictive power by measurements at multiple sites could potentially increase the success of osteoporosis screening programs. In a cross-sectional study on 137 postmenopausal women, we tested the hypothesis that bone assessment at the hip, the forearm, and the tibia are independently associated with osteoporotic fractures of the hip. Bone mineral densities, geometric features, and ultrasound properties were determined with hip dual X-ray absorptiometry, forearm peripheral quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and tibia speed of sound measurement. While the odds ratios for fracture discrimination per standard deviation decrease ranged between 3 and 4 for measurements at the hip, they were only 1.8 at the forearm and 1.4 at the tibia. Measurements at the tibia or the forearm were neither independently associated with osteoporotic hip fractures (p > 0.05) nor could any combination of measurements significantly increase the power for the identification of fractures as measured with receiver operating curves. Women who sustained trochanteric fractures were characterized by a generalized loss of bone mineral. Cervical fractures were associated with a decrease of bone mineral density at the hip, but no significant alterations in bone mass or geometric properties were observed at the tibia or at the forearm. Fracture risk prediction at the hip is therefore preferably performed by measurements at the hip itself. Peripheral QCT at the distal radius and tibial ultrasound seem capable of depicting women with an increased risk for trochanteric but not for cervical fractures. The risk assessment appears not to be improved by including information of cortical or geometric properties of the forearm.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Non-programmatic

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9556141     DOI: 10.1016/s8756-3282(97)00302-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  9 in total

Review 1.  Bone imaging: traditional techniques and their interpretation.

Authors:  Holger F Boehm; Thomas M Link
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 5.096

2.  A Trimodality Comparison of Volumetric Bone Imaging Technologies. Part III: SD, SEE, LSC Association With Fragility Fractures.

Authors:  Andy K O Wong; Karen A Beattie; Kevin K H Min; Zamir Merali; Colin E Webber; Christopher L Gordon; Alexandra Papaioannou; Angela M W Cheung; Jonathan D Adachi
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 2.617

Review 3.  A Comparison of Peripheral Imaging Technologies for Bone and Muscle Quantification: a Mixed Methods Clinical Review.

Authors:  Andy Kin On Wong
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.096

4.  Discrimination of fractures by low-frequency axial transmission ultrasound in postmenopausal females.

Authors:  P Moilanen; M Määttä; V Kilappa; L Xu; P H F Nicholson; M Alén; J Timonen; T Jämsä; S Cheng
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-05-26       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  The discriminative ability of peripheral and axial bone measurements to identify proximal femoral, vertebral, distal forearm and proximal humeral fractures: a case control study.

Authors:  Jackie A Clowes; Richard Eastell; Nicola F A Peel
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-06-10       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Quantitative Ultrasound (QUS) in the Management of Osteoporosis and Assessment of Fracture Risk: An Update.

Authors:  Didier Hans; Antoine Métrailler; Elena Gonzalez Rodriguez; Olivier Lamy; Enisa Shevroja
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 2.622

7.  Two new regions of interest to evaluate separately cortical and trabecular BMD in the proximal femur using DXA.

Authors:  Sven Prevrhal; Margarita Meta; Harry K Genant
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-11-04       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Association between low-frequency ultrasound and hip fractures -- comparison with DXA-based BMD.

Authors:  Mikko Määttä; Petro Moilanen; Jussi Timonen; Pasi Pulkkinen; Raija Korpelainen; Timo Jämsä
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 9.  Biomechanics of Osteoporotic Fracture Fixation.

Authors:  Marianne Hollensteiner; Sabrina Sandriesser; Emily Bliven; Christian von Rüden; Peter Augat
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 5.096

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.