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

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
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":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695024000374","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","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.

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 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信