• Online Features  This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (21)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Rheumatology  • Osteoporosis  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

William D. Leslie, MD, MSc; Lisa M. Lix, PhD; James F. Tsang, BSc; Patricia A. Caetano, PhD; for the Manitoba Bone Density Program

Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(15):1641-1647.

Background  Bone density measurement with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry is widely used for fracture risk assessment. Discordance between measurement sites is common, but it is unclear how this affects fracture prediction.

Methods  We performed a historical cohort study among 16 505 women 50 years or older at the time of baseline dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry of the spine and hip (mean ± SD observation period, 3.2 ± 1.5 years). The study population was drawn from a database that contains all clinical dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry test results for the province of Manitoba, Canada. Each subject's longitudinal health service record was assessed for the presence of fracture codes after bone density testing. The likelihood ratio test was used to assess the improvement in fracture prediction from Cox proportional hazards models using bone density covariates from a single site or from combined sites.

Results  Age-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation for osteoporotic fracture ranged from 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-1.87) for the lumbar spine to 1.85 (95% CI, 1.70-2.01) for the total hip, with intermediate values for the femur neck (HR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.62-1.92]) and trochanter (HR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.63-1.92]). For fracture prediction, use of the minimum bone density measurement was no better than use of a hip measurement alone. When the total hip measurement was included in a fracture prediction model for the overall population, none of the other measurements added substantial information. The spine was the most useful site for the prediction of spine fractures alone.

Conclusions  Proximal femur bone density measurements consistently outperformed lumbar spine measurements for global fracture prediction. In this cohort, the total hip was the best site for overall fracture assessment.

Author Affiliations: Faculty of Medicine (Dr Leslie and Mr Tsang), Department of Community Health Sciences, Manitoba Centre for Health Policy (Dr Lix), and Faculty of Pharmacy (Dr Caetano), University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

CiteULike    Connotea    Delicious    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

A Before-and-After Study of Fracture Risk Reporting and Osteoporosis Treatment Initiation
Leslie et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2010;153:580-586.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Value of routine monitoring of bone mineral density after starting bisphosphonate treatment: secondary analysis of trial data
Bell et al.
BMJ 2009;338:b2266-b2266.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT