León HSR, Mayorga MJG

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 200-206
PDF size: 96.79 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. Estimate the best cross section of the bone mineral density (BMD) measure simultaneously by dual energy X ray absortiometry (DEXA) and quantitative computed tomography (CTT) for discrimination and prognosis of the compression fractures of the vertebral bodies. Material and methods. 12 women were included with fractures of the vertebral bodies and 27 without fractures. In both groups was measure (BMD) by DEXA and TCC. Results. DEXA and TCC has similar results with severe osteoporosis in 9 patients with fractures but average of BMD was so different (p = 0.0001); DEXA find osteopenia and TCC severe osteoporosis in 3 remaining women of fracture group (p=0.0001); findings of 21/27 patients of the control group was normal; DEXA in one case find normal and TCC osteopenia, DEXA find osteopenia and TCC osteoporosis in 5 remaining control group of the total of 27 (p = 0.0001). The best cross sections to elevate simultaneously sensibility and specificity of DEXA and TCC accord COR curves will be: 0.7005 and 0.6515 g/cm2 respectively; so parallel application, increase sensibility from 83.3% to 91.7% to detect women high risk of compression fractures of the vertebral bodies compatibles with bone fragility. Conclusions. 1.- DEXA is no rely on to measure BMD of the vertebral bodies of our sample to predict fracture risk 2.- We advise to use DEXA and TCC to predict risk of compression fractures of the vertebral bodies, DEXA measure cortical and TCC trabecular quality.

REFERENCES

1. Aaron JE, Makins NB, Sagreiya K: The microanatomy of trabecular bone loss in normal aging men and women. Clin Orthop 1987; (215): 260-71.

2. Brown JR, Josse RG: 2002 clinical practice guideline for diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. CMAJ 2002; 12: 167: S1-S34.

3. Cann CE, Genant HK, Kolb FO, Ettinger B: Quantitative computed tomography for prediction of vertebral fracture risk. Bone 1985; 6(1): 1-7.

4. Cooper C: Osteoporosis an epidemiological perspective: a review. J R Soc Med 1989; 82(12): 752-57.

5. Guidelines for preclinical evaluation and clinical trials in osteoporosis. Geneva: WHO 1999: 59.

6. Harma M, Heliovaava M, Aromaa A, Kneckt P: Thoracic spine compression fractures in Finland. Clin Orthop 1986; (205): 189-94.

7. Heaney RP: Qualitative factors in osteporotic fracture: the state of the question. In: Christiansen C, et al., eds. Osteoporosis 1987, 1. Proceedings of the international symposium on osteoporosis, Denmark, 1987. Copenhagen, Osteopress ApS, 1987: 288-7.

8. Kanis JA, et al: Ten year probabilities of osteoporotic fractures according to BMD and diagnostic thresholds. Osteoporos Int 2001; 12(12): 989-95.

9. Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman P, Abbott TA, Berger M: Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: a summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. J Bone Miner Res 2000; 15(4): 721-39.

10. McClung MR, Geusens P, Miller PD, Zippel H, Bensen WG, Roux C, et al : Effects of risendronate on the risk of hip fracture in elderly women. N Engl J Med 2001; 344(5): 333-40.

11. Melton LJ 3rd, et al: Vertebral fractures predict subsequent fractures. Osteoporos Int 1999; 14(10): 214-21.

12. Seeman E: Pathogenesis of bone fragility in women and men. Lancet 2002; 359(9320): 1841-50.