Determination of age-specific bone mineral density and comparison of diagnosis and prevalence of primary osteoporosis in Chinese women based on both Chinese and World Health Organization criteria

The aim of this study was to determine age-specific bone mineral density (BMD) at various skeletal regions in a native Chinese reference population, and to explore the differences in the diagnosis of primary osteoporosis and estimated prevalence of osteoporosis based on both Chinese criteria (BMD of subjects, 25% lower than the peak BMD) and WHO criteria (BMD of subjects, 2.5 SD [T-score –2.5] lower than the young adult mean [YAM]). There were 3406 subjects in our female reference population, ranging in age from 10 to 90 years. A dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) fan-beam bone densitometer (Hologic QDR 4500A) was used to measure the BMD in subjects at the posteroanterior (PA) spine (L1–L4), supine lateral spine (L2–L4 including areal BMD [aBMD] and volumetric BMD [vBMD]), hip (including femoral neck and total hip), and radius + ulna ultradistal (R + UUD) of the forearm. Cross-sectional data analysis in stratified 5-year age intervals revealed that the peak BMD (PBMD) at various skeletal regions occurred within the age range of 30–44 years, with PBMD at the lateral spine and femoral neck occurring at 30–34 years, posteroanterior spine and total hip at 35–39 years, and ultradistal forearm at 35–44 years. The reference values of BMD (PBMD) calculated using Chinese criteria for the diagnosis of primary osteoporosis were significantly higher than the young adult mean (YAM) using WHO criteria for all skeletal regions except for the total hip, at a range of 0.9%–3.8% higher. The BMD cutoff values using Chinese criteria for the diagnosis of osteoporosis were 3.7%–10.9% higher than those using WHO criteria for various skeletal regions. The prevalence rate of primary osteoporosis according to Chinese criteria in subjects ranging from 50 to 90 years was 41.5% at the PA spine, 53.9% at the lateral spine, 34.2% at the femoral neck, 30.7% for total hip, and 51.4% at R + UUD; while according to WHO criteria, this rate was 32.1% at the PA spine, 34.9% at the lateral spine, 16.3% at the femoral neck, 18.9% for total hip, and 45.2% at R + UUD. The prevalence of primary osteoporosis according to both criteria varied with the age and skeletal region of the subjects. The prevalence of primary osteoporosis using Chinese criteria, compared with WHO criteria was 31% higher at the lumbar spine, 109% higher at the femoral neck, and 14% higher at the ultradistal forearm. In conclusion, PBMD occurs in the age range of 30–44 years in native Chinese females. The BMD reference values, BMD cutoff values, and prevalence of primary osteoporosis determined by Chinese criteria are all higher than those determined by the WHO criteria; thus, the application of Chinese criteria may overestimate the number of patients with primary osteoporosis.     

骨质疏松症诊断标准的探讨

本文目的是再次讨论骨质疏松的诊断标准问题。骨质疏松症的诊断以骨密度DXA检测为金标准。1994年世界卫生组织(WHO)推荐的骨质疏松诊断标准为:患者骨密度低于同性别人群峰值骨量均值2.5个标准差以上,或减少30%以上。这个标准的T值是根据年轻白人妇女计算的,但是对于不同地区是不能固守这一标准的。有研究调查我国部分地区骨质疏松症总患病率为32.3%(2.0SD)和14.9%(2.5SD),2种骨密度诊断标准计算骨质疏松症患病率差异有显著性,若以2.5SD为标准很可能造成漏诊。该研究者还发现骨质疏松症的患病率在老年远高于年轻人。而WHO采用的是白人年轻女性的数据库,它是否适用就更值得推敲。另有研究者以骨密度低于-2.0SD标准,推算杭州市妇女骨质疏松的发病率为29.5%。认为以-2.0SD为标准可以相对早期发现骨质疏松。还有研究对于高原的藏族人群进行检测,也得出同样结论。有研究者推算我国各个DXA仪器之间的换算公式,发现上述换算公式基本上与日本推出的相同,但是与美国推出的换算公式有差异。这都证明WHO骨密度诊断标准是否适用于黄种人是有疑问的。国内有研究者以BMD-2.0SD为诊断标准,结合以骨代谢生化指标,认为能全面合理评价骨转换。还有研究者对目前国内使用骨密度检测方法进行统计分析,发现60岁骨量丢失率有18%左右,70岁阶段达到22%左右。这个患病百分率比较符合中国人的实际情况。按照世界上基本通用的换算方法,1.0SD约等于10%～12%的骨量丢失百分率,因此建议男性骨质疏松诊断标准为骨量丢失率达到25%或2.0SD,实际诊断年龄在70岁以上。如果采用2.5SD,中国人患病诊断时间会推迟到70岁以后,尤其是男性要推迟到90岁以后。骨质疏松症的研究关键是正确合理的诊断,不同种族、不同国家或地区有不同的诊断标准。1994年以前全世界都执行WHO1985年提出的峰值骨量丢失2.0个标准差诊断为骨质疏松症。1994年WHO提出了白人妇女小于-2.5SD为骨质疏松,但也明确指出该标准仅适用于欧美白人妇女。以Orimo为首的日本骨代谢学会制定了日本人群的骨质疏松诊断标准:骨密度在同性别青年人平均值30%以下为骨质疏松,丢失20%～30%为骨量减少。1999年中国老年学学会骨质疏松委员会诊断学组建议骨质疏松的诊断标准为骨量丢失百分率达到25%,或者说2.0SD。对于国外也有学者倾向于采用-2.0SD的标准来评价骨质疏松症。有研究发现不同国家间,和每国内部不同人群和人种的骨密度是明显不同的。非洲和拉丁美洲人种的骨密度高于白种人,而白种人的骨密度则高于黄种人。总结:1、国内外人群间骨密度的差异是公认的,我国人群骨密度是低于制定国际标准的白种人的,有倾向以T值低于-2.0SD为骨密度诊断标准。但是大规模的流行病学调查比较研究还很少,有必要进一步提供更确切的骨质疏松诊断更改的流行病学依据。2、以2.0SD为标准可以减少骨质疏松的漏诊,对于流行病学人群调查筛选病例,进行危险因素分析和对骨质疏松高危人群进行干预实验尤为有必要。3、如果加强国内和国际间多单位的联合研究,可以提高标准制定的科学性和权威性。     

Implications in the use of T-scores for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men.

Osteoporosis is recognized as a disorder of both men and women. However, the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of osteoporosis (a bone mineral density [BMD] T-score of -2.5 or less) was formulated for use with postmenopausal women only. In the absence of a BMD-based definition for male osteoporosis, the WHO definition is often applied to men as well. Several important questions exist when considering the use of T-scores in men. First, is the WHO definition appropriate for men? What is the impact of using a -2.5 criteria, in terms of the number of men that would be identified as osteoporotic? When calculating T-scores in men, should male or female young normal values be used? Can the same T-score criteria be used for all skeletal sites and technologies? To address these questions, osteoporosis prevalence estimates for men aged 50 yr and over were generated using WHO methods and manufacturer normative data from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and ultrasound. Estimates were determined for several skeletal sites and technologies using both male and female young normal values. Prevalence estimates were compared to published fracture risk estimates. Mean T-scores declined with age at all measurement sites. Discrepancies were found between the different skeletal sites and techniques, similar to the previously reported differences in women. A -2.5 criterion (based on young normal males or females) appeared to underestimate the prevalence of osteoporosis, except for QCT, which seemed to overestimate risk. Depending on the technique used, 0 to 12.5 million US men 50 yr of age and older would be classified as osteoporotic using the WHO definition. T-Scores based on male norms were less discordant across skeletal sites than female-based T-scores. Male-based T-scores between -1.8 and -2.3 using DXA and ultrasound and -3.1 for QCT provided osteoporosis prevalence estimates that approximated the likelihood of common fractures in men 50 and over. We conclude that the use of single T-score-based criterion for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in men has many potential difficulties. BMD measurement techniques provide discrepant estimates of prevalence and may underestimate the size of the male population at risk for fracture. Based on available normative data, a -2.5 criterion underestimates osteoporosis prevalence in men, whether based on male or female norms. Prospective studies are needed to further refinement to the BMD definition of osteoporosis in men.     

The Assessment of Bone Mass in Men

Bone mineral density (BMD) is widely used in postmenopausal women to identify who should be given therapy for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis and to monitor the efficacy of treatment. There is still uncertainty about how to interpret BMD in men, and few prospective studies exist on the relationship between BMD and fracture risk. Men should be considered for measurement of BMD if they have suffered low trauma fractures, have prevalent vertebral deformities, have radiographic osteopenia, are over age 75, or have conditions that increase their risk for bone loss, such as hypogonadism, glucocorticoid use, or generally poor health. There is insufficient information to recommend a more widespread BMD screening. The World Health Organization has developed criteria for interpreting BMD which are widely used. Patients with BMD at least 2.5 SD below the young adult mean (T-score < -2.5) have osteoporosis, and those with BMD between 1 and -2.5 SD below the young adult mean (-2.5 < T-score < -1.0) have osteopenia. However, the BMD criteria that should be used to identify men in need of therapeutic intervention are still debated. Using male-specific hip BMD cutoffs, approximately 3-6% of U.S. men 50 years and older were estimated to have osteoporosis and 28-47% to have osteopenia. The corresponding figures in women were 13-18% with osteoporosis and 37-50% with osteopenia. Greater accumulation of skeletal mass during growth, slower rate of bone loss, and shorter life expectancy in men contribute to the lower prevalence of osteoporosis relative to women.     

Instant Vertebral Assessment: A Noninvasive Dual X-ray Absorptiometry Technique to Avoid Misclassification and Clinical Mismanagement of Osteoporosis

The presence of a vertebral fracture significantly increases the risk of future fracture, classifies a patient with "clinical" osteoporosis, and usually results in treatment for osteoporosis. However, the majority of vertebral fractures are silent, and lateral X-rays (the standard method for identification) are not routinely obtained. Instant vertebral assessment (IVA), a technology that utilizes dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), provides rapid assessment of vertebral fractures and is highly correlated with vertebral fractures, as assessed on standard lateral spine X-rays. To assess the role of IVA in patient management, we examined standard bone mineral density (BMD) of the spine, total hip, and femoral neck and spine IVA by DXA in 482 participants screened for an osteoporosis study, who had no previous knowledge of vertebral fractures. Using World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines, subjects were classified using BMD at the spine, total hip, femoral neck, or any combination of these central sites. In addition, we considered subjects as osteoporotic if they had vertebral fractures independent of low bone density. We found that vertebral fractures assessed by IVA were present in 18.3% of asymptomatic postmenopausal women recruited for this study. The sensitivity of BMD alone to diagnose osteoporosis based on either a vertebral fracture or low BMD using WHO criteria ranged from 40 to 74%. This means that between 26 and 60% of osteoporotic individuals could have potentially been missed. Furthermore, 11.0-18.7% of clinically osteoporotic individuals would have been classified as normal by BMD criteria alone. We conclude that IVA is a useful adjunct in the clinical identification of osteoporosis and may prevent mismanagement of osteoporotic patients.     

Age-related decline in bone mass measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and quantitative ultrasound in a population-based sample of both sexes: identification of useful ultrasound thresholds for osteoporosis screening.

Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) can be used as a screening tool for low bone mineral density (BMD), but clinical guidelines have not been set. The aim of this population-based, cross-sectional study was to compare age-related changes in bone mass measured by QUS (Lunar, Achilles Plus) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a random sample of 1630 individuals (1041 females, 589 males) 30-85 yr of age. Individuals with DXA T-scores < or =-2.5 at the femoral neck or total hip were identified and receiver operating curves (ROCs) were used to calculate cutoff points for QUS. Sensitivity, specificity, and kappa statistics were calculated. Age-related bone loss was significantly larger with QUS than DXA at all sites in women. For men, the curves were similar for QUS and DXA in the hip. Similar correlations were found between QUS and DXA in different age groups of both sexes (0.36-0.60). For women aged 50-65 yr, a QUS T-score >-1.0 was found to be the most applicable for identifying normal BMD. In the 70-85 yr age group, a T-score <-2.5 for women and a T-score <-0.5 for men seemed reasonable cutoffs for identifying normal BMD (sensitivity: 86-93%; specificity: 28-44%; discordance: 33-73%). Calcaneal QUS cannot be used for the diagnosis of osteoporosis according to WHO criteria, but it can be of use to exclude osteoporosis in 30-40% of our cases.     

Use of a Swedish T-score reference population for women causes a two-fold increase in the amount of postmenopausal Swedish patients that fulfill the WHO criteria for osteoporosis

The WHO criteria for osteoporosis are based on bone mineral density (BMD) values in comparison to a reference population of healthy young adults. The aim of this study was to create BMD references for ethnic Swedish women, and to investigate whether the use of these T-score measurements influence the amount of Swedish postmenopausal patients that are diagnosed as having osteoporosis. A bone density reference was created by measuring a population-based sample of 335 randomly selected Swedish women aged 20-39yr. BMD was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the lumbar spine, proximal femur, and total body. These locally derived T-score values were subsequently used to diagnose a sample of 300 consecutive postmenopausal Swedish patients referred to the Uppsala Osteoporosis Unit. There was a slight age-dependent decrease in femoral neck BMD, whereas no age effect was seen at other sites such as total hip, lumbar spine, or total body. This suggests that the cohort represents the steady state BMD at the ages of expected peak bone mass in Swedish women. The correlation between BMD measures at different sites differed from r=0.55 (lumbar spine BMD vs femoral neck BMD [FNBMD]) to r=0.92 (total hip BMD vs FNBMD). Central DXA-generated T-scores were calculated from this cohort, and these were significantly higher (0.3-0.5 SD) as compared with manufacturers and NHANESIII reference populations. This indicates that young Swedish women have a higher peak bone mass than the subjects included in the reference populations currently used for clinical measurements. The T-score in total hip derived from the investigated cohort was subsequently used to diagnose 300 clinical patients (mean age 63yr) referred for a DXA scan by their physicians. The use of this locally established and ethnic representative, T-score reference increased the prevalence of osteoporosis in femoral neck and total hip with 53-106%. A Swedish female BMD reference representing peak bone mass has been established and the normative data are presented. Notably, this cohort has considerably higher BMD as compared to the NHANESIII and manufacturer's reference populations. The use of the present T-score reference therefore causes approximately a 2-fold increase in the amount of Swedish postmenopausal women that fulfill the WHO criteria for osteoporosis. This demonstrates the problems with using T-score as diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis and is an argument for future strategies to obtain standardized densitometric cut-offs, for example, mg/cm(2).     

椎体成形术中椎体骨密度对骨水泥弥散体积的影响

目的:探讨椎体成形术中椎体骨密度对骨水泥弥散体积的影响。方法:18例胸腰椎压缩骨折患者,术前均行骨折椎体双能X线骨密度仪测定,根据WHO骨质疏松症诊断标准分为骨密度正常组(A组)、骨密度减低组(B组)及骨质疏松组(C组),每组6例,采用经伤椎单侧椎弓根行椎体成形术,术中注入相同状态和批次骨水泥2.5ml,术后采用64排CT扫描椎体,计算骨水泥注射体积及弥散体积。结果:所有患者均顺利完成手术并均成功注2.5ml骨水泥,CT计算骨水泥注射体积:A组2.460±0.116cm3,B组2.450±0.038cm3,C组2.457±0.037cm3;骨水泥在椎体中弥散体积:A组为6.717±1.127cm3,B组为5.650±0.669cm3,C组为4.617±0.542cm3。三组骨水泥弥散体积均大于同组注射体积(P<0.01);三组间骨水泥注射提及比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。弥散体积比较均有统计学差异(P<0.05),A组弥散体积最大。结论:椎体成形术中骨水泥弥散体积大于骨水泥注射体积;椎体骨密度与椎体内骨水泥弥散体积密切相关,骨密度越高,弥散体积越大。     

Discordance in patient classification using T-scores.

In their original study report, "Assessment of Fracture Risk and Its Application to Screening for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis," the World Health Organization (WHO) explicitly stated that any T-score criterion for osteoporosis is sensitive to bone mineral density (BMD) measurement site and technique, as well as the young adult reference population. Yet, the T = -2.5 criterion introduced by WHO is used for many different BMD techniques, despite the fact that it was based primarily on the relationship between forearm measurements and prevalent hip fracture in postmenopausal Caucasian females. It is reasonable to expect that a T-score threshold of -2.5 may be inappropriate for different skeletal sites and measurement techniques. This may explain the large variation in osteoporosis prevalence observed when different skeletal sites are measured. In this study, we compared the prevalence of osteoporosis (based on the T = -2.5 criterion) at different skeletal sites using the manufacturer's normative data. We determined the expected mean T-score for a 60-yr-old Caucasian female at the heel (ultrasound), hip (dual X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), spine (PA DXA, lateral DXA, and quantitative computed tomography [QCT]), and forearm (DXA). Assuming a normal distribution of T-scores at a fixed age, we computed the expected percentage of 60-yr-old Caucasian women that would be classified as osteoporotic using the -2.5 standard deviation criterion for each technique. At age 60 yr, the expected mean T-score ranged from -2.5 (spine QCT) to -0.7 (heel). Prevalence estimates ranged from 3% at the heel to 50% for spinal QCT. It was also noted that the sites with the strongest relationship to hip fracture risk (the hip and heel) showed the least age-related T-score decline and lowest estimated prevalence. We conclude that a single T-score criterion cannot be universally applied to all BMD measurements. The discrepancies in the prevalence of osteoporosis are the result of several factors, including differences in age-related bone loss at different skeletal sites, differences in the young adult reference populations used by the various bone densitometry devices, and technology-related differences. Using estimated BMD by heel ultrasound, few patients will have T-scores below -2.5, whereas most postmenopausal women will fall below this level for spine bone density measurements performed by lateral DXA or QCT. Based on these data, it may be necessary to provide a T-score criterion specific to the type of densitometric evaluation performed.     

Classification of osteoporosis based on bone mineral densities.

In this article we examine the role of bone mineral density (BMD) in the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Using information from 7671 women in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF) with BMD measurements at the proximal femur, lumbar spine, forearm, and calcaneus, we examine three models with differing criteria for the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Model 1 is based on the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria using a T score of -2.5 relative to the manufacturers' young normative data aged 20-29 years, with modifications using information from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Model 2 uses a T score of -1 relative to women aged 65 years at the baseline of the SOF population. Model 3 classifies women as osteoporotic if their estimated osteoporotic fracture risk (spine and/or hip) based on age and BMD is above 14.6%. We compare the agreement in osteoporosis classification according to the different BMD measurements for the three models. We also consider whether reporting additional BMD parameters at the femur or forearm improves risk assessment for osteoporotic fractures. We observe that using the WHO criteria with the manufacturers' normative data results in very inconsistent diagnoses. Only 25% of subjects are consistently diagnosed by all of the eight BMD variables. Such inconsistency is reduced by using a common elderly normative population as in model 2, in which case 50% of the subjects are consistently diagnosed as osteoporotic by all of the eight diagnostic methods. Risk-based diagnostic criteria as in model 3 improve consistency substantially to 68%. Combining the results of BMD assessments at more than one region of interest (ROI) from a single scan significantly increases prediction of hip and/or spine fracture risk and elevates the relative risk with increasing number of low BMD subregions. We conclude that standardization of normative data, perhaps referenced to an older population, may be necessary when applying T scores as diagnostic criteria in patient management. A risk-based osteoporosis classification does not depend on the manufacturers' reference data and may be more consistent and efficient for patient diagnosis.     

Preptin对2型糖尿病性骨质疏松患者骨密度的相关性

目的 探讨Preptin在2型糖尿病性骨质疏松患者骨密度（bone mineral density,BMD）的相关性。方法 纳入2型糖尿病患者88例,根据骨密度T值分为3组：骨量正常组（T值＞-1.0）(N组）、骨量减少组(-2.5＜T值≤-1.0)（R组）和骨质疏松组（T值≤-2.5）（OP组）,比较3组患者一般临床资料、临床检验指标、骨密度、血浆Preptin以及结缔组织生长因子（connective tissue growth factor,CTGF）、骨特异性碱性磷酸酶（bone specific alkaline phosphatase,BAP）水平,利用Pearson相关分析研究BMD与一般资料、临床检验资料及骨代谢相关指标间的相关性,并采用SPSS 19.0统计学软件进行Preptin与CTGF、BAP相关曲线的绘制。结果 3组患者体重、体质量指数差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。3组患者骨密度以及骨代谢相关指标均存在显著差异,随着骨密度的降低,3组间Preptin、CTGF、BAP浓度逐渐降低,差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。L2～L4 BMD与Preptin、ALP-B、CTGF均呈正相关,Preptin与ALP-B、CTGF均呈正相关(P＜0.05)。结论 Preptin通过调节CTGF、BAP水平,在2型糖尿病性骨质疏松症的发生发展中发挥重要作用。     

Bone Mineral Density of the Spine, Hip and Distal Forearm in Representative Samples of the Japanese Female Population: Japanese Population-Based Osteoporosis (JPOS) Study

Low bone mineral density (BMD) is one of the most important elements for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and screening people with higher risk of fractures. To establish the criterion value of BMD for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and to estimate the prevalence rate of osteoporosis in Japanese women, we performed a Japanese population-based osteoporosis (JPOS) study. The subjects were 4550 women aged 15 through 79 years randomly selected from seven municipalities throughout Japan. The sample size was determined to ensure that the observed mean BMD would remain within 2.5% from the real value with a probability of 0.95 in each of the 5-year age groups. The study comprised bone mass measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the spine (L2–4), hip and distal forearm, body size measurements and detailed interviews on medical and gynecologic history. After excluding those subjects with apparent or suggested abnormalities affecting bone mass from 3985 women (87.6%) who completed the study, 3465 women remained and served as the subjects. We present 5-year age-specific mean values of BMD and cut-off values for the diagnosis of osteoporosis according to World Health Organization (WHO) and the Japanese Society of Bone and Mineral Research (JSBMR) criteria. The cut-off levels at the spine and the distal radius proposed in this study were similar to those proposed by the JSBMR but the cut-off level at the femoral neck in this study was 4.7% higher than that of the JSBMR. The prevalence rates of osteoporosis according to WHO criteria in the present subjects aged 50 through 79 years were calculated as 38.0% at the spine, 11.6% at the femoral neck and 56.8% at the distal one-third site of the radius, and those in the Japanese female population of the same age were estimated to be 35.1%, 9.4% and 51.2%, respectively. A fivefold difference was observed among the prevalence rates at different skeletal sites, which suggests that the different definitions of osteoporosis should be established for the different skeletal sites. The prevalence rate diagnosed at the femoral neck seemed to be lower in the present study than those reported for Caucasians. This might account for a lower incidence rate of hip fracture in Japanese women. Received: 6 June 2000 / Accepted: 5 January 2001     

Hand Ultrasound for Osteoporosis Screening in Postmenopausal Women

There is a need for low-cost screening methods to detect low bone mass (osteopenia or osteoporosis) in postmenopausal women. The utility of quantitative ultrasonography (QUS) of the hand was assessed for osteoporosis screening using the WHO criteria. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured in 206 postmenopausal Mexican-American women at the total hip and lumbar spine by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The amplitude-dependent speed of sound (AD-SoS) was measured in the phalanges by QUS. Subjects identified by DXA as having osteopenia or osteoporosis had significantly lower AD-SoS values in comparison with normals. Estrogen users had significantly higher spine and hip BMD and AD-SoS values compared with non-estrogen users. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC) for AD-SoS to screen for osteoporosis (T-score ≤−2.5) at the spine or hip were 0.73 for all subjects, 0.74 for estrogen users and 0.68 for non-estrogen users. The AUC for non-estrogen users to screen for osteopenia (T-score −1 to −2.5) was 0.77. Performance comparisons of AD-SoS with SCORE (a risk factor questionnaire) and body weight showed AUC values of 0.73, 0.69 and 0.65, respectively. QUS was the superior screening test when considering both the AUC and the shape of the ROC curves. For non-estrogen users, the group at higher risk for osteoporosis, QUS correctly identified 31% as normal, and 62% as having low bone mass and needing DXA referral; and the remaining 7% were false negatives. These data suggest phalangeal QUS can be effectively used for screening osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Received: 2 April 1998 / Accepted: 27 July 1999     

Patient assessment using standardized bone mineral density values and a national reference database: implementing uniform thresholds for the reimbursement of osteoporosis treatments in Belgium

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) devices from the three main manufacturers provide different bone mineral density (BMD) values, due in part to technical differences in the algorithms for bone mineral content (BMC) and area measurements and in part to the use of different manufacturer-derived reference databases. As a result, significant differences exist between Hologic, Lunar and Norland systems in the reported young normal standard deviation scores or T-scores. In a number of European countries, including Belgium, a T-score below -2.5 is one of the key criteria for reimbursement of osteoporosis treatments. This paper addresses the first attempt to implement a nationwide, uniform expression of BMD in patients, in order to harmonize drug reimbursement. To this end, measures were taken to implement a uniform expression of BMD in Belgian patients, by converting each manufacturer's absolute BMD to standardized BMD (sBMD) values and by establishing a single national reference range.     

Ludwigshafener Osteoporosescreeningbogen (LOS-Bogen)

Background

Osteoporosis is a major health problem worldwide and is included in the WHO list of the top ten major diseases. However, it is often undiagnosed until the first fracture occurs, due to inadequate patient education and lack of insurance coverage for screening tests.

Methods and material

In our study of 78 patients with metaphyseal long bone fractures, we searched for a correlation between anamnestic risk factors, bone-specific laboratory values, and the bone morphogenic density (BMD). Each indicator was examined as a possible diagnostic instrument for osteoporosis. The secondary aim of this study was to demonstrate the high prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with metaphyseal fractures.

Results

Of our fracture patients 76.9% had decreased bone density and 43.6% showed manifest osteoporosis in DXA (densitometry) measurements. Our modified LOS Questionnaire, identifying anamnestic risk factors, correlated highly significantly (p=0.01) with reduced BMD, whereas seven bone-specific laboratory values (p=0.046) correlated significantly.

Conclusion

Anamnestic risk factors correlate with pathological BMD more than bone-specific laboratory values. The LOS Questionnaire used in this study would therefore function as a cost-effective primary diagnostic instrument for identification of osteoporosis patients.     

Clinical risk factor status in patients with vertebral fracture but normal bone mineral density

BACKGROUND CONTEXTNormal bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is present in approximately 10% of older adults with fracture. BMD alone does not evaluate bone quality or clinical risk factors, and therefore, may not adequately capture a patient's fracture risk. Thus, despite a normal DXA-measured BMD, the underlying bone may be abnormal, suggesting that further bone health evaluation, and potentially, pharmacologic treatment may be warranted.PURPOSETo determine the prevalence of normal BMD, clinical fracture risk factors, and quantitative risk of fracture using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) in vertebral fracture patients with normal BMD enrolled in the Own the Bone registry, thus facilitating identification of those who meet criteria for anti-osteoporosis therapy.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGRetrospective, national registry-based cohort.PATIENT SAMPLEFrom July 2016 to July 2021, 1,807 patients age ≥50 who sustained a vertebral fracture and had DXA data available from within 2 years prior to enrollment in the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone (AOA OTB) registry were included.OUTCOME MEASURESWorld Health Organization (WHO) DXA T-score based bone classification criteria; FRAX risk scores of major osteoporotic fracture or hip fracture.METHODSDemographic data, prior fracture site, and clinical fracture risk factors were collected. BMD status was classified by the WHO T-score criteria: ≥ -1.0 normal, -1.1 to -2.4 osteopenia, and ≤ -2.5 osteoporosis, with low bone mass including either osteopenia or osteoporosis. In normal BMD patients, FRAX scores were calculated with and without BMD, with the treatment threshold defined as a major osteoporotic fracture risk ≥20% or hip fracture risk ≥3%.RESULTSMean±SD age was 72.0±9.7, 78.1% were female, and 92.4% were Caucasian. Normal BMD was present in 7.9%. Clinical fracture risk factors including alcohol use ≥3 units/day and history of ≥2 falls in the year prior to enrollment were more common in normal BMD (11.2% and 28%, respectively) compared to low bone mass patients (3.4% and 25.2%, respectively). A prior vertebral fracture had occurred in 49.5% with normal BMD compared to 45.8% with low bone mass, while a prior non-major osteoporotic fracture occurred in 28.9% and 29.3% of normal BMD and low bone mass patients, respectively. In normal BMD patients, either a prior fracture or FRAX risk with BMD meeting treatment thresholds was present in 85%.CONCLUSIONSClear indications for receipt of pharmacologic therapy, ie, prior fracture or elevated fracture risk, were present in most patients with vertebral fracture and normal BMD enrolled in the AOA OTB. Prior non-major osteoporotic fractures were common and may be useful indicators of underlying bone disease. Surgeons must recognize that other important risk factors apart from BMD may indicate poor bone health, and thus, help guide further bone health evaluation.     

我国中老年脆性髋部骨折及桡骨远端骨折骨质疏松诊断标准与WHO诊断标准的比较分析

目的评估我国中老年髋部骨折及桡骨远端骨折骨质疏松诊断标准与世界卫生组织(World Health Organization,WHO)诊断标准的不同所产生的骨质疏松人群的数量差异,更加精确地指导临床对适宜骨质疏松人群的筛查及治疗。方法收集2016年8月至2018年2月我院骨科年龄在60～80岁的脆性髋部骨折女性患者110例及桡骨远端骨折女性患者100例及与年龄相仿的正常人女性312名,使用双能X线骨密度仪测量腰1～4、股骨颈、股骨大粗隆骨密度,分别计算骨质疏松率;再按照我国骨质疏松诊断标准及WHO诊断标准进行比较分析。结果脆性髋部骨折女性患者腰1～4、股骨颈、股骨大粗隆骨密度低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);骨质疏松率高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。脆性桡骨远端骨折女性患者腰1～4、股骨颈骨密度低于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);骨质疏松率高于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。股骨大粗隆骨密度低于对照组,骨质疏松率高于对照组,但差异不具有统计学意义(P0.05)。按照我国骨质疏松诊断标准与WHO诊断标准进行比较,我国脆性髋部骨折及桡骨远端骨折骨质疏松人数多于WHO骨质疏松人数,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论据本文分析,我国脆性髋部骨折及桡骨远端骨折骨质疏松率明显高于正常人,我国骨质疏松诊断标准扩大了骨质疏松人数。呼吁更多研究评估我国骨质疏松骨折,特别是脆性桡骨远端骨折的诊断及治疗,适时调整我国骨质疏松诊断标准。     

Usefulness of quantitative heel ultrasound compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in determining bone mineral density in chronic haemodialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Reduced bone mineral density (BMD) is associated with renal osteodystrophy and osteoporosis in end-stage renal failure patients. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the standard non-invasive method to assess BMD, but is not always widely available. Quantitative heel ultrasound (QUS) is a mobile, relatively inexpensive, easy to perform and radiation-free method which can predict fractures to the same extent as DXA. This study assessed the usefulness of QUS vs DXA in determining BMD in chronic haemodialysis patients. METHODS: Patients had their BMD at the hip and spine measured by DXA (Lunar Expert). QUS of the left heel (McCue CubaClinical II machine) measured broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) and velocity of sound (VOS). Correlations between DXA and QUS parameters were calculated. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for BUA and VOS and used to define cut-off points for calculating sensitivities and specificities for BUA and VOS. Femoral neck BMD was applied as the standard for diagnosing osteoporosis (T< or =-2.5) and osteopaenia (T>-2.5 and < or =-1) by WHO criteria. RESULTS: Eighty eight patients (45.5% women), mean age 58+/-17 years, were studied. A total of 19% and 49% had femoral neck BMDs in the 'osteoporosis' and 'osteopaenia' ranges, respectively. There were good correlations between hip BMD and QUS parameters (r=0.68-0.79, P<0.001). Areas under the ROC curves for BUA and VOS in diagnosing 'osteoporosis' were 0.86 and 0.80, respectively. BUA and VOS had sensitivities of 76 and 71% and specificities of 80 and 69%, respectively, for diagnosing 'osteoporosis'. The positive predictive values for BUA and VOS were 48 and 35%, respectively, and the negative predictive values were 93 and 91% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DXA and QUS parameters were significantly correlated. However, sensitivities and specificities of QUS parameters were not sufficiently high for QUS to be used simply as an alternative to DXA. The relatively high negative predictive values suggest that QUS may reliably screen out patients unlikely to have a BMD in the osteoporotic range. The relatively low positive predictive values, however, mean that subjects classified as osteoporotic using QUS require further investigations such as DXA to confirm the diagnosis.     

High Prevalence of Osteoporosis in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease Prior to Liver Transplantation

Osteoporosis is a common complication of liver transplantation. Its pathogenesis is multifactorial, but preexisting bone disease in patients with chronic liver disease is likely to play an important role. The aim of this study was to evaluate bone mineral density in adult patients with chronic liver disease prior to liver transplantation. A total of 243 consecutive patients (128 male, 115 female; mean age 51.1years) with chronic liver disease undergoing assessment for transplantation, were recruited over a 4-year period. BMD measurements were made using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in the lumbar spine (L1-L4) and femoral neck (FN). Osteoporosis and osteopenia were defined by WHO criteria. Osteoporosis at either L1-L4 or FN was present in 36.6%, osteopenia in 48.1%, and normal BMD in only 15.2% of patients. There was no difference in prevalence of osteoporosis between males and females (P = 0.442). Women with osteoporosis were on average 10 years older (56.2 +/- 1.4 years) than those with normal bone density (46.4 +/- 2.3 years) P = 0.002; in men, no statistically significant age effect was found. Patients with osteoporosis had on average lower body weight than those with normal bone density (64.9 +/- 1.8 kg vs 74.2 +/- 2.2 kg) P = 0.003. T-scores in patients with cholestatic liver disease were lower than in non-cholestatic disease and the lowest BMD values were found in patients with cystic fibrosis. Logistic regression revealed that in women, increasing age (P = 0.004; OR = 1.12; CI 1.04-1.21) and lower body weight (P = 0.01; OR = 0.95; CI 0.91-0.99) were significant independent risk factors for osteoporosis but menopausal status (P = 0.1; OR = 0.24; CI 0.05-1.32) and presence or absence of cholestasis (P = 0.326; OR = 1.54; CI 0.65-3.67) were not. There were no independent risk factors in men. This study demonstrates a high prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with chronic liver disease prior to liver transplantation, men and women being equally affected. With the exception of increasing age and lower body weight in women, no independent risk factors were found, emphasizing the importance of BMD measurements in these patients and the need for prophylactic measures to optimize bone health.     

The Range of Bone Mineral Density in Healthy Canarian Women by Dual X-ray Absorptiometry Radiography and Quantitative Computer Tomography

Bone mass measurements play a crucial role in the diagnosis of osteoporosis. According to a World Health Organization (WHO) Working Group, osteoporosis in women can be diagnosed if the value for bone mineral density (BMD) is 2.5 or more standard deviations below the mean value of a young reference population. This definition obviously requires the availability of normal data, which should ideally be obtained locally. The objective was establish normal values of BMD in the female Canarian population, by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the lumbar spine and the proximal femur, and by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) in the lumbar spine, and to study the correlation between the results of both techniques and the changes with age. Seven hundred forty-four Healthy Canarian women, from 20-80 yr old were examined. Measurement of bone density was performed by an Hologic QDR 1000 densitometer (DXA) in the lumbar spine and proximal femur, and by a Toshiba scanner model 600 HQ in the lumbar spine. Both methods show that the peak bone mass is achieved in the fourth decade (30-39 yr). Bone density decreases thereafter with age in the lumbar spine (r = -0.3364 DXA and r = -0.6988 for QCT) and in the femoral neck (r = -0.3988). Bone density mean values obtained by DXA are very similar to those described in Spain and in other European female populations, using the same densitometer. The correlations between both techniques (DXA and QCT) were high and statistically significant (p < 0.001 in every case). Normal values in the normal Canarian women for DXA and QCT are provided. Our results are very similar to those previously described. These two techniques have a close correlation.