Literature DB >> 9850349

How the new Hologic hip normal reference values affect the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Z Chen1, M Maricic, P Lund, J Tesser, O Gluck.   

Abstract

In February 1997, Hologic supplied new software to all QDR dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) machines replacing the previous femoral normative reference database with the NHANES III normative data. In addition to changing the normative database (and therefore T-scores) for all regions of the hip, the new software has changed the primary region of interest from the femoral neck to the total hip. In the present study we examined how these changes influence the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis in a large clinical referral population (n = 2311, mean age 62.7 years). The patients had spine and hip DXA performed at either of two centers using a Hologic QDR-2000 over a 4-year period. T-scores were derived for each patient using both previous and current young normal reference databases. Intraindividual differences in T-scores were calculated. The prevalence of osteoporosis based on the two normative databases and the difference between the prevalence was calculated for each skeletal site. The average paired difference between current and previous T-scores at femoral neck is 0.64, the difference increasing with age. Using the new normative database, the percentage of osteoporotic patients decreases from 49% of all patients at the femoral neck to 28% at the femoral neck and 20% at the total hip. In conclusion, the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis will be affected in a significant proportion of women as a result of the implementation of the new hip normative database supplied by Hologic. Whether this will translate into fewer patients being treated remains to be seen.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9850349     DOI: 10.1007/s001980050086

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  7 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

Review 2.  Diagnosis of postmenopausal osteoporosis: reviews in endocrine and metabolic disorders.

Authors:  A T Shields; C H Chesnut
Journal:  Rev Endocr Metab Disord       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 6.514

3.  Variations in diagnostic performances of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the northwest of The Netherlands.

Authors:  Klaas P Staal; Jan C Roos; Radu A Manoliu; Piet J Kostense; Paul Lips
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-11-20       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  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

5.  Endpoint comparison for bone mineral density measurements in North Central Cancer Treatment Group cancer clinical trials N02C1 and N03CC (Alliance).

Authors:  A C Dueck; J Singh; P Atherton; H Liu; P Novotny; S Hines; C L Loprinzi; E A Perez; A Tan; K Burger; X Zhao; B Diekmann; J A Sloan
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  The impact of hip subregion reference data on osteoporosis diagnosis.

Authors:  William D Leslie; Patricia A Caetano; E Bruce Roe
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-06-04       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Bone mineral density measurement in the calcaneus with DXL: comparison with hip and spine measurements in a cross-sectional study of an elderly female population.

Authors:  H Salminen; M Sääf; H Ringertz; L-E Strender
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-21       Impact factor: 4.507

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.