Fracture Risk Associated with Different Numbers and Combinations of Lumbar Vertebrae: The Manitoba BMD Registry

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Journal of Clinical Densitometry Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1016/j.jocd.2024.101502
Fatima Zarzour, William D. Leslie
{"title":"Fracture Risk Associated with Different Numbers and Combinations of Lumbar Vertebrae: The Manitoba BMD Registry","authors":"Fatima Zarzour,&nbsp;William D. Leslie","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2024.101502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Bone mineral density (BMD) is widely used for assessment of fracture risk. For the lumbar spine, BMD is typically measured from L1-L4 as it provides the largest area for assessment with the best measurement precision. Structural artifact often confounds spine BMD in clinical practice, and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) recommends removing vertebrae with artifact when reporting spine BMD. In its most recent position statements, the ISCD recommended against the use of a single vertebra when reporting spine BMD but stated that further studies should be done. The current analysis was performed to compare the performance of BMD from different numbers and combination of vertebral levels on fracture prediction in a large clinical registry of DXA tests for the Province of Manitoba, Canada. The study population comprised 39,727 individuals aged 40 years and older (mean age 62.7 years, 91.0 % female) with baseline DXA after excluding those with evidence of structural artifact. Mean follow-up for ascertaining fracture outcomes was 8.7 years. Area under the curve (AUC) for incident fracture risk stratification was statistically significant regardless of the BMD measurement site or fracture outcome. AUC differences with the various numbers and combinations of vertebral levels including a single vertebral body were small (less than or equal to 0.01). More substantial AUC differences were seen for femoral neck and total hip BMD versus L1-L4 BMD, approaching 0.1 for hip fracture stratification. In summary, we found that using combinations of fewer than 4 vertebrae including individual lumbar vertebrae predicted incident fractures. Importantly, differences between these different combinations were small when compared with L1-L4. Spine BMD was a better predictor of incident spine fracture compared to the hip, whereas the hip was better for hip fracture and overall fracture prediction.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","volume":"27 3","pages":"Article 101502"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695024000374","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bone mineral density (BMD) is widely used for assessment of fracture risk. For the lumbar spine, BMD is typically measured from L1-L4 as it provides the largest area for assessment with the best measurement precision. Structural artifact often confounds spine BMD in clinical practice, and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) recommends removing vertebrae with artifact when reporting spine BMD. In its most recent position statements, the ISCD recommended against the use of a single vertebra when reporting spine BMD but stated that further studies should be done. The current analysis was performed to compare the performance of BMD from different numbers and combination of vertebral levels on fracture prediction in a large clinical registry of DXA tests for the Province of Manitoba, Canada. The study population comprised 39,727 individuals aged 40 years and older (mean age 62.7 years, 91.0 % female) with baseline DXA after excluding those with evidence of structural artifact. Mean follow-up for ascertaining fracture outcomes was 8.7 years. Area under the curve (AUC) for incident fracture risk stratification was statistically significant regardless of the BMD measurement site or fracture outcome. AUC differences with the various numbers and combinations of vertebral levels including a single vertebral body were small (less than or equal to 0.01). More substantial AUC differences were seen for femoral neck and total hip BMD versus L1-L4 BMD, approaching 0.1 for hip fracture stratification. In summary, we found that using combinations of fewer than 4 vertebrae including individual lumbar vertebrae predicted incident fractures. Importantly, differences between these different combinations were small when compared with L1-L4. Spine BMD was a better predictor of incident spine fracture compared to the hip, whereas the hip was better for hip fracture and overall fracture prediction.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同数量和组合的腰椎相关骨折风险:马尼托巴省 BMD 登记
骨矿物质密度(BMD)被广泛用于评估骨折风险。对于腰椎,BMD 通常从 L1-L4 开始测量,因为它提供了最大的评估面积和最佳的测量精度。在临床实践中,结构伪影经常会干扰脊柱 BMD 的测量,国际临床密度测量学会(ISCD)建议在报告脊柱 BMD 时去除存在伪影的椎骨。在最新的立场声明中,ISCD 建议在报告脊柱 BMD 时不要使用单个椎体,但指出应进行进一步研究。目前的分析是在加拿大马尼托巴省的一个大型 DXA 检测临床登记处进行的,目的是比较不同数量和组合的椎体水平 BMD 对骨折预测的影响。研究对象包括 39,727 名 40 岁及以上的患者(平均年龄 62.7 岁,91.0% 为女性),在排除有结构伪影证据的患者后,他们都接受了基线 DXA 检查。确定骨折结果的平均随访时间为 8.7 年。无论 BMD 测量部位或骨折结果如何,事故骨折风险分层的曲线下面积 (AUC) 都具有显著的统计学意义。不同数量和组合的椎体水平(包括单一椎体)的 AUC 差异很小(小于或等于 0.01)。股骨颈和全髋关节 BMD 与 L1-L4 BMD 的 AUC 差异更大,在髋部骨折分层中接近 0.1。总之,我们发现使用包括单个腰椎在内的少于 4 个椎体的组合可预测骨折的发生。重要的是,与 L1-L4 相比,这些不同组合之间的差异很小。与髋部相比,脊柱 BMD 更能预测脊柱骨折的发生,而髋部 BMD 更能预测髋部骨折和整体骨折的发生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Journal of Clinical Densitometry 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
92
审稿时长
90 days
期刊介绍: The Journal is committed to serving ISCD''s mission - the education of heterogenous physician specialties and technologists who are involved in the clinical assessment of skeletal health. The focus of JCD is bone mass measurement, including epidemiology of bone mass, how drugs and diseases alter bone mass, new techniques and quality assurance in bone mass imaging technologies, and bone mass health/economics. Combining high quality research and review articles with sound, practice-oriented advice, JCD meets the diverse diagnostic and management needs of radiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists, rheumatologists, gynecologists, family physicians, internists, and technologists whose patients require diagnostic clinical densitometry for therapeutic management.
期刊最新文献
Effect of a high-impact exercise program on hip strength indices in a group of obese women after bariatric surgery. Bone health ECHO case report: High bone mass in a patient with chronic kidney disease. Calcaneal bone mineral assessment in elite female trail runners. Corrigendum to "Follow-up bone mineral density testing: 2023 official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry" Journal of clinical densitometry: Assessment and management of musculoskeletal health vol 27(1), 101440,2024. Cross-calibration of areal bone mineral densities and body composition between DMS Stratos and Hologic Horizon A dual-energy X-ray absorptiometers: The effect of body mass index.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1