Fracture Risk Assessment Tool Research Articles

Prevalence and predictors of asymptomatic vertebral fracture in patients with end-stage renal disease

ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of asymptomatic vertebral fracture in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing hemodialysis. MethodsThis cross-sectional study included 80 patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing hemodialysis. Medical history, Fracture Risk Assessment Tool and anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the thoracolumbar and lumbosacral spine were obtained. Vertebral fractures were identified using the Genant semiquantitative assessment. ResultsRadiography demonstrated asymptomatic vertebral fracture in 22 patients (27.5%). FRAX® results for major osteoporotic fracture (area under the curve, 0.64) and hip fracture (area under the curve, 0.62) were able to discriminate patients with prevalent asymptomatic vertebral fracture. A multivariate analysis demonstrated that a 1-year average corrected calcium (odds ratio, 0.38), steroid use (odds ratio, 8.99), and a serum albumin concentration <25 g/dL (odds ratio, 28.82) significantly predicted prevalent asymptomatic vertebral fracture (clinical model; area under the curve, 0.82). Combining the 1-year average corrected calcium and serum albumin concentration <25 g/dL with FRAX® results for major osteoporotic fracture (area under the curve, 0.78) and FRAX® results for hip (area under the curve, 0.75) produced a significantly greater area under the curve value to predict fracture when compared with FRAX® result for major osteoporotic fracture and FRAX® result for hip (P = 0.022). ConclusionAsymptomatic vertebral fracture is prevalent. FRAX® results for major osteoporotic fracture and hip provided lower ability in predicting asymptomatic vertebral facture when compared to the clinical model. Combining a 1-year average corrected calcium and serum albumin concentration <25 g/dL with FRAX® result for major osteoporotic fracture or hip improved the model's performance and provided comparable area under the curve to the clinical model.

Effect of Bone Health Optimization on Osteoporosis Screening and Treatment Before Thoracolumbar Fusion

Objective:Osteoporosis is not rare in thoracolumbar spine fusion patients and may portend poorer surgical outcomes. Implementation of a bone health optimization (BHO) clinic improves osteoporosis screening and treatment in the total joint arthroplasty population. We hypothesize that preoperative osteoporosis is common, under-recognized, and undertreated in thoracolumbar fusion patients and that a BHO clinic will increase preoperative osteoporosis screening rates and pharmacologic osteoporosis treatment in this population.Methods:This retrospective case series includes adults older than 30 years who underwent elective thoracolumbar spine fusion at a single tertiary care center before and after creation of a BHO referral clinic. Data collected included preoperative osteoporosis risk factors, prior dual-energy radiograph absorptiometry testing, and prior osteoporosis pharmacotherapy. Fracture risk was estimated using the fracture risk assessment tool with and without bone mineral density (BMD), and the US National Osteoporosis Foundation criteria for screening and treatment were applied.Results:Ninety patients were included in the pre-BHO group; 53 patients met criteria for BMD measurement, but only 10 were tested within 2 years preoperatively. Sixteen patients (18%) met criteria for osteoporosis pharmacotherapy, but only 5 of the 16 (31%) received osteoporosis medication within 6 months of surgery. There were 87 patients in the post-BHO group, and 19 were referred to the BHO clinic. BMD measurement was done in 17 of the patients (89%) referred to the BHO clinic compared with 10% for those not referred. All patients (n = 7) referred to the BHO clinic meeting treatment criteria received treatment within 6 months before surgery, whereas only 25% of the patients not referred received treatment.Discussion:Osteoporosis is not rare in adults undergoing thoracolumbar spine fusion with ∼13% to 18% meeting criteria for pharmacotherapy. Preoperative BHO referral increases screening and treatment.

Future Fracture Risk in Upper Extremity Fracture and Non-Fracture Patients.

Upper extremity (UE) fragility fractures are common and strong predictors of subsequent fractures. To investigate the relative importance of an UE fragility fracture in determining future fracture risk, we conducted a cross-sectional study to compare future fracture risk between patients presenting for osteoporosis evaluation after an UE fragility fracture and a similarly aged cohort of patients without an UE fracture. In all, 129 UE fracture patients seen in our bone health clinic (BHC) and 114 non-fracture UE fracture patients seen in an UE clinic completed clinic intake surveys assessing for fracture risk factors. Prefracture fracture risk (PFFR) and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) scores estimated the future fracture risks at the timepoint before and after the UE fragility fracture event, respectively. The primary study outcome was the 10-year risk of future fracture. The 10-year probability of major osteoporotic and hip fractures were significantly higher among the BHC group when estimated with FRAX. When estimated with PFFR score, there was no difference in the 10-year probability of hip fracture between the groups. Prevalence of secondary osteoporosis and glucocorticoid use was higher in the BHC group, and prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis was higher in the UE clinic group. This study underscores the importance of an UE fragility fracture in determining the risk of future fracture. A fragility fracture of the UE should be considered a sentinel event and physicians who evaluate these patients should recognize them as a high-risk group for future hip fracture.

Evaluation of fracture risk in Egyptian rheumatoid arthritis patients by the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have a risk of fractures due to secondary osteoporosis. This study aimed to evaluate the probability of fractures in the next 10 years in Egyptian RA patients by the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX).ResultsThe study was a case–control study. It included a hundred RA patients as well as 51 apparently healthy volunteers. Bone mineral density (BMD) means of lumbar vertebra, femoral neck, and total femur were significantly lower in the RA patient group. Additionally, FRAX of the major osteoporotic and hip fractures means were significantly higher in the RA group than in the control group. It was also found that age, body mass index (BMI), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), and BMD of the femoral neck were significant predictors of FRAX of major osteoporotic and hip fractures (P ≤ 0.05). The cumulative dose of steroids was a significant predictor for FRAX of major osteoporotic fractures; however, the 28 joints disease activity score calculated with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) (DAS28-ESR) was a significant predictor for FRAX of hip fractures.ConclusionsRA patients have a high fracture risk probability. Regular annual screening for BMD and FRAX of major osteoporotic and hip fractures is necessary for those patients.

Bone mineral density in fracture neck of femur patients: What's the significance?

BACKGROUNDThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines have advised further research is required into investigating the added prognostic value of bone mineral density (BMD) in the assessment of fracture risk with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) score.AIMTo investigate the significance of BMD in fracture neck of femur patients and compare it to the outcome of the FRAX score.METHODSInclusion criteria for this study were all patients who underwent dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan following fracture neck of femur between 2015 and 2017. Analysis of BMD, FRAX scores and patient demographic data was undertaken.RESULTSA total of 69 patients were included in the study, mean age 74.1 years. There was no significant difference between mean BMD of the femoral neck in males (0.65) as compared to females (0.61) (P = 0.364). Analyses showed no significant correlation between BMD and menopause age (rs = -0.28, P = 0.090). A significant difference was seen of the femoral neck BMD between the different fracture pattern types (P = 0.026). A stronger correlation was observed between BMD of femoral neck and FRAX major score (rs = -0.64, P < 0.001) than with BMD of lumbar spine and FRAX major score (rs = -0.37, P = 0.003).CONCLUSIONThis study demonstrated that BMD of the femoral neck measured by DXA scan is of added prognostic value when assessing patients for risk of fracture neck of femur in combination with the FRAX predictive scoring system.

Assessment of Osteoporosis in Lumbar Spine: In Vivo Quantitative MR Imaging of Collagen Bound Water in Trabecular Bone.

AimBone collagen matrix makes a crucial contribution to the mechanical properties of bone by imparting tensile strength and elasticity. The collagen content of bone is accessible via quantification of collagen bound water (CBW) indirectly. We prospectively study the performance of the CBW proton density (CBWPD) measured by a 3D short repetition time adiabatic inversion recovery prepared ultrashort echo time (STAIR-UTE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequence in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in human lumbar spine.MethodsA total of 189 participants with a mean age of 56 (ranged from 50 to 86) years old were underwent MRI, quantitative computed tomography (QCT), and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in lumbar spine. Major fracture risk was also evaluated for all participants using Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX). Lumbar CBWPD, bone marrow fat fraction (BMFF), bone mineral density (BMD) and T score values were calculated in three vertebrae (L2–L4) for each subject. Both the CBWPD and BMFF were correlated with BMD, T score, and FRAX score for comparison. The abilities of the CBWPD and BMFF to discriminate between three different cohorts, which included normal subjects, patients with osteopenia, and patients with osteoporosis, were also evaluated and compared using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis.ResultsThe CBWPD showed strong correlation with standard BMD (R2 = 0.75, P < 0.001) and T score (R2 = 0.59, P < 0.001), as well as a moderate correlation with FRAX score (R2 = 0.48, P < 0.001). High area under the curve (AUC) values (≥ 0.84 using QCT as reference; ≥ 0.76 using DXA as reference) obtained from ROC analysis demonstrated that the CBWPD was capable of well differentiating between the three different subject cohorts. Moreover, the CBWPD had better correlations with BMD, T score, and FRAX score than BMFF, and also performed better in cohort discrimination.ConclusionThe STAIR-UTE-measured CBWPD is a promising biomarker in the assessment of bone quality and fracture risk.

Cortical bone structure of the proximal femur and incident fractures.

Fracture risk is most frequently assessed using Dual X-ray absorptiometry to measure areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX). However, these approaches have limitations and additional bone measurements may enhance the predictive ability of these existing tools. Increased cortical porosity has been associated with incident fracture in some studies, but not in others. In this prospective study, we examined whether cortical bone structure of the proximal femur predicts incident fractures independent of aBMD and FRAX score. We pooled 211 postmenopausal women with fractures aged 54-94years at baseline and 232 fracture-free age-matched controls based on a prior nested case-control study from the Tromsø Study in Norway. We assessed baseline femoral neck (FN) aBMD, calculated FRAX 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF), and quantified femoral subtrochanteric cortical parameters: porosity, area, thickness, and volumetric BMD (vBMD) from CT images using the StrAx1.0 software. Associations between bone parameters and any incident fracture, MOF and hip fracture were determined using Cox's proportional hazard models to calculate hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval. During a median follow-up of 7.2years, 114 (25.7%) of 443 women suffered one or more incident fracture. Cortical bone structure did not predict any incident fracture or MOF after adjustment for age, BMI, and previous fracture. Each SD higher total cortical porosity, thinner cortices, and lower cortical vBMD predicted hip fracture with increased risk of 46-62% (HRs ranging from 1.46 (1.01-2.11) to 1.62 (1.02-2.57)). After adjustment for FN aBMD or FRAX score no association remained significant. Both lower FN aBMD and higher FRAX score predicted any incident fracture, MOF and hip fractures with HRs ranging from 1.45-2.56. This study showed that cortical bone measurements using clinical CT did not add substantial insight into fracture risk beyond FN aBMD and FRAX. We infer from these results that fracture risk related to the deteriorated bone structure seems to be largely captured by a measurement of FN aBMD and the FRAX tool.

Using machine learning to predict fracture risk in large U.S. population: An Analysis of NHANES 2005-2014

Fractures cause a significant burden and disability worldwide with an overall estimated incidence of ∼1.2/100 person-years. However, such risk is often assessed arbitrarily and the appropriate fracture risk assessment tool based on the large data is not available. We aimed to develop and test the performance of a fracture risk prediction score in general population.

An optimal intervention threshold of FRAX in postmenopausal Thai women.

Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) has been widely used as an intervention threshold for initiating osteoporosis treatment. However, there is a lack of data to validate the threshold in Thai population. A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2014 to February 2019. Postmenopausal women in the Northeast of Thailand whom has bone mineral density (BMD) measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the study period were recruited. Participants who had previously received anti-osteoporotic treatment were not eligible. FRAX score, both with and without BMD, was calculated using a Thai reference. Prevalent hip fracture was identified by reviewing the ICD-10 diagnosis from the hospital database during the study period. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Youden index were used to determine the FRAX threshold in predicting hip fracture, based on the rationale that women with a prevalent hip fracture would be eligible for treatment. A total of 2872 postmenopausal Thai women were recruited, with 45 sustained a recent hip fracture. In association with hip fracture, the optimal FRAX thresholds for hip fracture without and with BMD were 4.9% and 4%, respectively, with 71.1% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity, and 82.2% sensitivity and 78.6% specificity, while the optimal FRAX thresholds for major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) without and with BMD were 9.8% and 8.9%, respectively, with 75.6% sensitivity and 77.0% specificity, and 86.7% sensitivity and 70.9% specificity. An optimal intervention threshold based on FRAX of hip fracture and MOF in postmenopausal Thai women is slightly different from the standard recommendation, which confirmed the marked variations of thresholds across ethnicities. The proposed threshold should be considered as new cutoff for initiating osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal Thais.

Effects of Long-Term Tenofovir and Entecavir Treatment on Bone Mineral Density in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B.

We aimed to investigate the long-term effects of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir treatment on bone mineral density and evaluated the fracture risk assessment tool score in patients with chronic hepatitis B. A total of 58 chronic hepatitis B patients treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (n = 40) and entecavir (n = 18) were included in this prospective study from 2012 to 2016. To evaluate bone mineral density, dual-X-ray absorptiometry, fracture risk assessment tool, and laboratory examinations were performed in all patients first at baseline and second at the end of the study. Age, sex, body mass index, fibrosis score, and viral load were similar in both groups. The mean follow-up was 33 months in the tenofovir disoproxil fumarate group and 31 months in the entecavir group. In patients treated with entecavir, there was no statistically significant difference between baseline and second bone mineral density including lumbar spine (L) and total hip T score. In patients treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, there was a significant difference in the second bone mineral density compared with baseline bone mineral density for L3 (P = .033) and the major fracture risk assessment tool score (P = .03). When patients were divided into 3 groups (normal bone mineral density, osteopenic, and osteoporotic), there was a significant increase in the number of osteopenic patients in the total hip T score after tenofovir disoproxil fumarate treatment (P = .034). Our results suggest a decrease in the bone mineral density for lumbar spine (L3), an increase in the number of patients with hip osteopenia, and major fracture risk assessment tool score after long-term tenofovir disoproxil fumarate treatment in patients with rechronic hepatitis B.

Association of Trabecular Bone Score-Adjusted Fracture Risk Assessment Tool with Coronary Artery Calcification in Women.

The trabecular bone score (TBS) was found to be significantly associated with moderate coronary artery calcification (CAC). The aim of this study was to further explore the association between TBS-adjusted Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and CAC score in women. The electronic medical record database of a regional teaching hospital in southern Taiwan yielded women who received both coronary computed tomography and bone mineral density (BMD) measurement during their general health examination. Health history, anthropomorphic measurements, laboratory results, BMD, and T-scores were obtained. TBS values were calculated from database spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry files. Linear regression analyses tested the association between CAC score and 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF) determined by TBS-adjusted FRAX. Of the 116 women (mean age 55.8 years) studied, 24.1% had osteoporosis. Simple linear regression showed a significant association of CAC score with an increase in MOF and HF risk as measured by TBS-adjusted FRAX. In multiple linear regression adjusted for potential confounders, CAC score remained significantly associated with TBS-adjusted FRAX for right MOF (p = 0.002), left MOF (p = 0 006), right HF (p = 0.005), and left HF (p = 0.015). In conclusion, clinicians should be vigilant to the potential increased risk of coronary events among women with increased TBS-adjusted FRAX for MOF and HF.

Selection of risk assessment methods for osteoporosis screening in postmenopausal women with low-energy fractures: A comparison of fracture risk assessment tool, digital X-ray radiogrammetry, and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Objectives:Fracture liaison services are designed to identify patients needing osteoporosis treatment after a fracture. Some fracture liaison service designs involve a prescreening step, for example, fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX®). Another possible prescreening tools are bone mass density assessment in the acute setting. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of prescreening tools.Methods:In the present prospective cohort study, women aged >55 years with a radius fracture were included. Patients were recruited at the emergency department after experiencing their fracture. All patients performed fracture risk assessment by fracture risk assessment tool, and bone mass density assessment by digital X-ray radiogrammetry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (prescreening steps) as well as full routine evaluation at the osteoporosis unit (endpoint). The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and area under the curve.Results:Forty-one women were recruited (mean age: 70 ± 8 years). Of these, 54% fulfilled the treatment indication criteria of osteoporosis after a full examination. Fracture risk assessment tool without bone mass density (cutoff ⩾ 15%) for prescreening patients had a high sensitivity (90%) but a low area under the curve (0.50) and specificity (16%). The highest area under the curve (0.73) was found prescreening with bone mass density assessment (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or digital X-ray radiogrammetry) having a sensitivity of 59%–86% and specificity of 61%–90%.Conclusion:This study, though small, raises questions regarding the effectiveness of using a prescreening step in fracture liaison services for high-risk individuals. In this cohort, FRAX® without bone mass density had a low precision, with a risk of both underestimating and overestimating patients requiring treatment. Bone mass density assessment in the acute setting could improve the precision of prescreening. Further investigations on the effectiveness and health economics of prescreening steps in fracture liaison services are needed.

Prediction Models for Osteoporotic Fractures Risk: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.

Osteoporotic fractures (OF) are a global public health problem currently. Many risk prediction models for OF have been developed, but their performance and methodological quality are unclear. We conducted this systematic review to summarize and critically appraise the OF risk prediction models. Three databases were searched until April 2021. Studies developing or validating multivariable models for OF risk prediction were considered eligible. Used the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool to appraise the risk of bias and applicability of included models. All results were narratively summarized and described. A total of 68 studies describing 70 newly developed prediction models and 138 external validations were included. Most models were explicitly developed (n=31, 44%) and validated (n=76, 55%) only for female. Only 22 developed models (31%) were externally validated. The most validated tool was Fracture Risk Assessment Tool. Overall, only a few models showed outstanding (n=3, 1%) or excellent (n=32, 15%) prediction discrimination. Calibration of developed models (n=25, 36%) or external validation models (n=33, 24%) were rarely assessed. No model was rated as low risk of bias, mostly because of an insufficient number of cases and inappropriate assessment of calibration. There are a certain number of OF risk prediction models. However, few models have been thoroughly internally validated or externally validated (with calibration being unassessed for most of the models), and all models showed methodological shortcomings. Instead of developing completely new models, future research is suggested to validate, improve, and analyze the impact of existing models.

Higher prevalence of metabolic bone disease (MBD) but similar fracture risk in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) compared to chronic viral hepatitis

Background and Aim: A link between NAFLD and MBD has been reported. However, the main implication of MBD is fracture risk which has been largely unexplored in NAFLD. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, the gold standard for osteopenia and osteoporosis, is an incomplete predictor of fracture risk which is substantially influenced by clinical risk factors. Fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) is validated for prediction of 10-year risk of major osteoporotic or hip fractures. Methods: In this ongoing cross-sectional study, we aim to compare prevalence of MBD and assess fracture risk in non-cirrhotic NAFLD with chronic viral hepatitis (CVH). Exclusion criteria include age<40 years, pregnancy, evidence of cirrhosis on imaging or liver stiffness measurement (LSM) > 12 kPa, CKD, treatment with calcium, vitamin D, tenofovir or anti-osteoporotic medications, presence of skeletal deformities or refusal to give consent. MBD, osteopenia and osteoporosis are defined as T-score <-1, -1 to -2.5 and <-2.5, respectively. Fracture risk will be estimated using the Indian FRAX calculator. Results : So far, 82 NAFLD and 99 CVH have been recruited [Hepatitis B: 19 (19.2%) Hepatitis C: 80 (80.8%)] with no difference in age or gender. NAFLD patients had significantly higher BMI and higher likelihood of T2DM, hypertension and Vitamin D insufficiency. MBD (54.9% vs 29.3%, p<0.001), osteopenia (47.6% vs 28.3%, p=0.008) and osteoporosis (7.3% vs 1%, p=0.03) were significantly more common in NAFLD. NAFLD was independently associated with MBD [aOR: 1.89 (1.04-6.1, p=0.04) after adjusting for age, gender, Vitamin D, T2DM, obesity, smoking, alcohol and LSM. However, 10-year predicted major osteoporotic [1.2% (0.7 to 11.9) vs 1.1% (0.6-10.5), p=0.54] and hip fracture risk [0.15% (0 to 3.8) vs 0.1% (0 to 2.7), p=0.63] were comparable among NAFLD and CVH. Conclusions: Although, MBD is common in NAFLD, it may not portend an increased fracture risk compared to CVH.

A study to predict fracture risk using bone mineral density and FRAX score in patients on chronic maintenance haemodialysis.

Introduction:Disturbances in mineral and bone metabolism are prevalent in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and are important causes of morbidity also their diagnosis often delayed and require a spectrum of investigations. The current study attempts to predict and correlate, the fracture risk using simple tools like BMD and FRAX (Fracture Risk Assessment Tool) score in CKD patients.Methods:A cross-sectional study among 50 CKD patients age more that 40 years attending OPD (Out Patient Department) at a tertiary care Hospital in north India.Results:There is a negative correlation between BMD (NOF) and FRAX score for hip fracture risk and major osteoporotic fracture risk.Conclusion:The 10-year fracture risk in these patients, as predicted by FRAX score using FRAX (Indian) calculator, was significantly higher in CKD patients.Recommendation:FRAX can be useful tool for early screening of fracture risk in such situations for timely interventions.

Osteoporosis in 10 years time: a glimpse into the future of osteoporosis.

Patients living with osteoporosis are projected to increase dramatically in the next decade. Alongside the forecasted increased societal and economic burden, we will live a crisis of fractures. However, we will have novel pharmacological treatment to face this crisis and, more importantly, new optimized treatment strategies. Fracture liaison services will be probably implemented on a large scale worldwide, helping to prevent additional fractures in high-risk patients. In the next decade, novel advances in the diagnostic tools will be largely available. Moreover, new and more precise fracture risk assessment tools will change our ability to detect patients at high risk of fractures. Finally, big data and artificial intelligence will help us to move forward into the world of precision medicine. In the present review, we will discuss the future epidemiology and costs of osteoporosis, the advances in early and accurate diagnosis of osteoporosis, with a special focus on biomarkers and imaging tools. Then we will examine new and refined fracture risk assessment tools, the role of fracture liaison services, and a future perspective on osteoporosis treatment.

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) for fracture risk assessment in Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) using FRAX tool

Background and Aim: Hepatic osteodystrophy (HO) is common in HCV-cACLD but entailed fracture risk has not been explored. Fracture risk is governed by several clinical risk factors apart from bone mineral density (BMD). DEXA, the gold standard for BMD, is not widely available and entails radiation risks. Fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) is validated for prediction of 10-year risk of major osteoporotic or hip fractures. It includes various clinical risk factors with BMD at femur neck being an optional input.

Estimation of fracture risk by the FRAX tool in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a 10-year longitudinal validation study.

Background:The fracture risk assessment tool has been widely used to stratify the 10-year fracture risk to guide therapy. Using the actual fracture data of a 10-year longitudinal cohort of older patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, we reported an underestimation of the tool in predicting major symptomatic osteoporotic fractures. Treatment of osteoporosis in systemic lupus erythematosus should not be based on fracture risk estimation alone. Relevant time-dependent risk factors should be taken into account for an individualized decision.Objective:To compare the observed fracture incidence in a 10-year longitudinal cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with the fracture risk prediction from the fracture risk assessment (FRAX) tool.Methods:Adult patients (⩾40 years) with SLE who had a first DEXA scan performed in 2005–2009 were studied. The 10-year rates of major osteoporotic and hip fractures were estimated by FRAX using clinical data at DEXA with adjustment for prednisolone dosage. The actual incidence of clinical fractures at 10 years was compared with the estimated rates. Factors associated with new fractures were studied by logistic regression.Results:A total of 229 SLE patients were studied (age: 50.2 ± 6.6 years, 93% women). Glucocorticoid was used in 148 (65%) patients at baseline (mean dose: 7.3 ± 6.9 mg/day; 34% ⩾ 7.5 mg/day). Osteoporosis (bone mineral density T score ⩽ –2.5) at the hip, femoral neck, or spine was present in 61 (27%) patients. The estimated 10-year risk of major osteoporotic and hip fractures by FRAX was 3.4 ± 4.5% and 0.95 ± 2.3%, respectively. After 10 years, three patients developed hip fracture, 6 patients had limb fractures and 20 patients had symptomatic vertebral fractures (major osteoporotic fracture 12.7%, hip fracture 1.3%). The actual major osteoporotic fracture rate was significantly higher than the FRAX estimation (12.7% vs 3.4%; p < 0.001). Logistic regression revealed that osteoporosis (odds ratio (OR): 4.07 [1.51–10.9]), previous fragility fracture (OR: 3.18 [1.02–9.90]), and a parental history of fracture (OR: 4.44 [1.16–17.0]) were independently associated with new clinical fractures at 10 years.Conclusion:The FRAX tool underestimates the major clinical fracture risk at 10 years in patients with SLE.

Diagnosis of osteoporosis and prevention of osteoporotic fractures

Introduction. Osteoporosis is a metabolic bone disease characterized by reduced bone mineral density and damage to the bone microarchitecture, which leads to bone fragility, thus increasing the risk of osteoporotic fractures. While different diagnostic methods can be employed for detecting bone mineral density decrement in a timely manner, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry remains the gold standard in research and clinical practice. Bone mineral density estimation methods. Osteoporosis can be diagnosed through conventional radiography, quantitative ultrasonography, quantitative computed tomography, and magnetic resonance. Nonetheless, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is the gold standard in the diagnosis of osteoporosis on which further treatment and monitoring are based. The dual energy X-ray absorptiometry apparatus is equipped with the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool, which estimates the 10- year probability of a major fracture and hip fracture due to osteoporosis. The use and interpretation of osteoporosis diagnostic evaluation modalities is based on the International Society for Clinical Densitometry guidelines for diagnosing osteoporosis in adults and children. According to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry recommendations, the aforementioned quantitative visualization modalities should be used alongside laboratory analyses of bone metabolism markers to supplement diagnostics and monitor treatment efficacy in patients suffering from osteoporosis. Conclusion. Assessment of risk factors and early diagnosis are prerequisites for timely treatment and effective monitoring, which is necessary for arresting the progression of bone mineral density loss and preventing the occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Cross-sectional osteoporotic risk prediction with the FRAX without BMD in male and female patients attending OPD in a community health center of Bihar.

ABSTRACTBackground:Bone health is an important requirement for healthy aging. Osteoporosis is an important cause of both mortality and morbidity among older adults. If we can predict the risk of future osteoporosis by cost-effective methods, we can prevent it up to certain level and plan intervention accordingly. That’s why the present study aims to estimate the likelihood of osteoporosis in patients attending the outpatient department (OPD) in a selected community health center (CHC).Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted in a CNC in Siwan, Bihar, India. An equal number of male and female patients were recruited by quota sampling. A semi-structured proforma was prepared for data collection using the Fracture Risk Assessment (FRAX) tool without performing a bone mineral density (BMD) test in order to assess major osteoporotic fractures and risk for hip fractures with other requisite informationResults:The collected data were organized using Microsoft Excel and analyzed using the statistical software SPSS Statistics 20. As data were gleaned and put under different categories, a statistical analysis based on the Chi-square test was carried out, and an ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve was also drawn for statistical inference of the data gathered. The main findings of our analyses include the following: Approximately 15% males and 30% females in the study sample had a higher risk of osteoporosis and about 9% males and 36% females had a higher risk of hip fracture. Overall, the findings showed a statistically significant association (p < 0.05) between the gender of the participants and the FRAX risk scores for osteoporosis and hip fracture.Conclusion:Previously osteoporosis was thought of as a disease that affected only women; nevertheless, emerging findings show that osteoporosis is not unusual in men. The FRAX tool can be used as a screening tool before going for a BMD test.