Effects of severe lumbar spine structural artifact on trabecular bone score (TBS): The Manitoba BMD Registry

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
William D. Leslie , Neil Binkley , Didier Hans
{"title":"Effects of severe lumbar spine structural artifact on trabecular bone score (TBS): The Manitoba BMD Registry","authors":"William D. Leslie ,&nbsp;Neil Binkley ,&nbsp;Didier Hans","doi":"10.1016/j.jocd.2023.101433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Trabecular bone<span> score (TBS) is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. During DXA analysis and BMD reporting, it is standard practice to exclude lumbar vertebral levels affected by structural artifact. Although TBS is relatively insensitive to degenerative artifact, it is uncertain whether TBS is still useful in the presence extreme structural artifact that precludes reliable spine BMD measurement even after vertebral exclusions. Among individuals aged 40 years and older undergoing baseline DXA assessment from September 2012 to March 2018 we identified three mutually exclusive groups: spine BMD reporting performed without exclusions (Group 1, N=12,865), spine BMD reporting performed with vertebral exclusions (Group 2, N=4867), and spine BMD reporting not performed due to severe structural artifact (Group 3, N=1541). No significant TBS difference was seen for Group 2 versus Group 1 (referent), whereas TBS was significantly greater in Group 3 (+0.041 partially adjusted, +0.043 fully adjusted). When analyzed by the reason for vertebral exclusion, multilevel degenerative changes significantly increased TBS (+0.041 partially adjusted, +0.042 fully adjusted), while instrumentation significantly reduced TBS (-0.059 partially adjusted, -0.051 fully adjusted). Similar results were seen when analyses were restricted to those in Group 3 with a single reason for vertebral exclusions, and when follow up scans were also included. During mean follow-up of 2.5 years there were 802 (4.2 %) individuals with one or more incident fractures. L1-L4 TBS showed significant fracture </span></span>risk stratification<span> in all groups including Group 3 (P-interaction &gt;0.4). In conclusion, lumbar spine TBS can be reliably measured in the majority of lumbar spine DXA scans, including those with artifact affecting up to two vertebral levels. However, TBS is significantly affected by the presence of extreme structural artifact in the lumbar spine, especially those with multilevel degenerative disc changes and/or instrumentation that precludes reliable BMD reporting.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":50240,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Densitometry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094695023000835","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: 1

Abstract

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a bone mineral density (BMD)-independent risk factor for fracture. During DXA analysis and BMD reporting, it is standard practice to exclude lumbar vertebral levels affected by structural artifact. Although TBS is relatively insensitive to degenerative artifact, it is uncertain whether TBS is still useful in the presence extreme structural artifact that precludes reliable spine BMD measurement even after vertebral exclusions. Among individuals aged 40 years and older undergoing baseline DXA assessment from September 2012 to March 2018 we identified three mutually exclusive groups: spine BMD reporting performed without exclusions (Group 1, N=12,865), spine BMD reporting performed with vertebral exclusions (Group 2, N=4867), and spine BMD reporting not performed due to severe structural artifact (Group 3, N=1541). No significant TBS difference was seen for Group 2 versus Group 1 (referent), whereas TBS was significantly greater in Group 3 (+0.041 partially adjusted, +0.043 fully adjusted). When analyzed by the reason for vertebral exclusion, multilevel degenerative changes significantly increased TBS (+0.041 partially adjusted, +0.042 fully adjusted), while instrumentation significantly reduced TBS (-0.059 partially adjusted, -0.051 fully adjusted). Similar results were seen when analyses were restricted to those in Group 3 with a single reason for vertebral exclusions, and when follow up scans were also included. During mean follow-up of 2.5 years there were 802 (4.2 %) individuals with one or more incident fractures. L1-L4 TBS showed significant fracture risk stratification in all groups including Group 3 (P-interaction >0.4). In conclusion, lumbar spine TBS can be reliably measured in the majority of lumbar spine DXA scans, including those with artifact affecting up to two vertebral levels. However, TBS is significantly affected by the presence of extreme structural artifact in the lumbar spine, especially those with multilevel degenerative disc changes and/or instrumentation that precludes reliable BMD reporting.

严重腰椎结构伪影对骨小梁评分(TBS)的影响:曼尼托巴省BMD登记。
小梁骨评分(TBS)是骨密度(BMD)无关的骨折危险因素。在DXA分析和BMD报告期间,标准做法是排除受结构伪影影响的腰椎水平。尽管TBS对退行性伪影相对不敏感,但尚不确定TBS在存在极端结构伪影的情况下是否仍然有用,即使在脊椎排除后,这种伪影也会阻碍可靠的脊椎骨密度测量。在2012年9月至2018年3月接受基线DXA评估的40岁及以上个体中,我们确定了三个相互排斥的组:未排除的脊椎骨密度报告(第1组,N=12865)、排除脊椎骨密度的脊椎骨BMD报告(第2组,N=4867)和因严重结构伪影而未进行的脊椎骨骨密度报告。第2组与第1组(参考)的TBS无显著差异,而第3组的TBS显著更大(+0.041部分调整,+0.043完全调整)。当根据脊椎排斥的原因进行分析时,多级别退行性变化显著增加了TBS(+0.041部分调整,+0.042完全调整),而器械显著降低了TBS,-0.059部分调整,-0.051完全调整)。当分析仅限于第3组的分析,且只有一个脊椎排除的原因时,以及当随访扫描也包括在内时,也会看到类似的结果。在2.5年的平均随访中 %) 有一个或多个偶发骨折的个体。L1-L4 TBS在包括第3组在内的所有组中都显示出显著的骨折风险分层(P相互作用>0.4)。总之,在大多数腰椎DXA扫描中,包括影响两个椎骨水平的伪影扫描中,腰椎TBS都可以可靠地测量。然而,TBS受到腰椎极端结构伪影的显著影响,尤其是那些有多级别椎间盘退行性改变和/或仪器无法可靠报告BMD的患者。
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
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.
×
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