{"title":"类风湿性关节炎患者骨小梁评分、10 年骨折概率风险与脊椎骨折之间的关系","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.bonr.2024.101806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aim was to assess the association and predictive value of trabecular bone score (TBS), fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), and TBS-adjusted FRAX with prevalent vertebral fractures (VFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients diagnosed with RA were included in this cross-sectional study. Clinical data and laboratory tests were collected on the same day as the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan. TBS, bone mineral density (BMD), and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) were obtained from the DXA scan. We used the FRAX tool to assess the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF-FRAX) and hip fracture (HF-FRAX) with and without BMD. These parameters were further adjusted for TBS. Patients with prevalent VFs were defined as those with moderate to severe VFs from T4 to L4. VFs presence was used as the binary variable in the logistic regressions and receiving operator characteristics (ROC) curves analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixty-nine patients were enrolled, with 55.1 % being postmenopausal. The mean TBS was 1.328 ± 0.104. Osteoporosis according to the WHO criteria was present in 39 patients (56.5 %), and six patients (8.7 %) had VFs with thoracic predominance (66.67 %). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses did not show an association between TBS and vertebral fractures, but FRAX scores indicated such an association. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the MOF-FRAX score with BMD, MOF-FRAX score without BMD, TBS-adjusted MOF-FRAX score, and TBS were 0.837 [0.686–0.988], 0.795 [0.629–0.961], 0.778 [0.571–0.984], and 0.515 [0.298–0.731], respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In our RA patients, FRAX scores were associated with vertebral fractures (VFs), while TBS was not. The MOF-FRAX score combined with BMD, showed the best AUC for VFs in this population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":9043,"journal":{"name":"Bone Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association between trabecular bone score, 10-year probability risk for fracture, and vertebral fractures in rheumatoid arthritis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bonr.2024.101806\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aim was to assess the association and predictive value of trabecular bone score (TBS), fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), and TBS-adjusted FRAX with prevalent vertebral fractures (VFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Patients diagnosed with RA were included in this cross-sectional study. Clinical data and laboratory tests were collected on the same day as the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan. TBS, bone mineral density (BMD), and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) were obtained from the DXA scan. We used the FRAX tool to assess the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF-FRAX) and hip fracture (HF-FRAX) with and without BMD. These parameters were further adjusted for TBS. Patients with prevalent VFs were defined as those with moderate to severe VFs from T4 to L4. VFs presence was used as the binary variable in the logistic regressions and receiving operator characteristics (ROC) curves analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixty-nine patients were enrolled, with 55.1 % being postmenopausal. The mean TBS was 1.328 ± 0.104. Osteoporosis according to the WHO criteria was present in 39 patients (56.5 %), and six patients (8.7 %) had VFs with thoracic predominance (66.67 %). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses did not show an association between TBS and vertebral fractures, but FRAX scores indicated such an association. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the MOF-FRAX score with BMD, MOF-FRAX score without BMD, TBS-adjusted MOF-FRAX score, and TBS were 0.837 [0.686–0.988], 0.795 [0.629–0.961], 0.778 [0.571–0.984], and 0.515 [0.298–0.731], respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In our RA patients, FRAX scores were associated with vertebral fractures (VFs), while TBS was not. The MOF-FRAX score combined with BMD, showed the best AUC for VFs in this population.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone Reports\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187224000731\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352187224000731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Association between trabecular bone score, 10-year probability risk for fracture, and vertebral fractures in rheumatoid arthritis
Objectives
The aim was to assess the association and predictive value of trabecular bone score (TBS), fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), and TBS-adjusted FRAX with prevalent vertebral fractures (VFs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Methods
Patients diagnosed with RA were included in this cross-sectional study. Clinical data and laboratory tests were collected on the same day as the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan. TBS, bone mineral density (BMD), and vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) were obtained from the DXA scan. We used the FRAX tool to assess the 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF-FRAX) and hip fracture (HF-FRAX) with and without BMD. These parameters were further adjusted for TBS. Patients with prevalent VFs were defined as those with moderate to severe VFs from T4 to L4. VFs presence was used as the binary variable in the logistic regressions and receiving operator characteristics (ROC) curves analysis.
Results
Sixty-nine patients were enrolled, with 55.1 % being postmenopausal. The mean TBS was 1.328 ± 0.104. Osteoporosis according to the WHO criteria was present in 39 patients (56.5 %), and six patients (8.7 %) had VFs with thoracic predominance (66.67 %). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses did not show an association between TBS and vertebral fractures, but FRAX scores indicated such an association. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the MOF-FRAX score with BMD, MOF-FRAX score without BMD, TBS-adjusted MOF-FRAX score, and TBS were 0.837 [0.686–0.988], 0.795 [0.629–0.961], 0.778 [0.571–0.984], and 0.515 [0.298–0.731], respectively.
Conclusion
In our RA patients, FRAX scores were associated with vertebral fractures (VFs), while TBS was not. The MOF-FRAX score combined with BMD, showed the best AUC for VFs in this population.
Bone ReportsMedicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
444
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍:
Bone Reports is an interdisciplinary forum for the rapid publication of Original Research Articles and Case Reports across basic, translational and clinical aspects of bone and mineral metabolism. The journal publishes papers that are scientifically sound, with the peer review process focused principally on verifying sound methodologies, and correct data analysis and interpretation. We welcome studies either replicating or failing to replicate a previous study, and null findings. We fulfil a critical and current need to enhance research by publishing reproducibility studies and null findings.