Vnitr Lek 2010, 56(7):764-770

Femur strength index versus bone mineral density: new findings (Slovak epidemiological etudy)

J. Wendlová
Osteology Unit, Derer's University Hospital and Policlinic Bratislava, Slovakia, head Ass. Prof. Jaroslava Wendlová, MD, PhD.

Patients and methods:
We analysed the data in the sample (n = 3,215) of East Slovak women with a primary or secondary osteopenia, osteoporosis and with risk factors for osteoporosis, aged 20-89 years, median 59 years, 95% C. I. (59.31; 60.07) obtained from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry device (Prodigy-Primo, GE, USA). Measured variables: 1. left proximal femur: T-score total hip, FSI (femur strength index), 2. lumbar vertebrae L1-L4: BMD (bone mineral density).

Objectives:
1. To estimate and to compare an expected frequency of pathological FSI < 1 and T-score total hip ≤ -2.5 SD values in the East Slovak female population. 2. To estimate expected frequency of women with: FSI < 1 and T-score total hip ≤ -2.5 SD (Group A), FSI < 1 and T-score total hip from interval from -1,0 till -2.5 SD (Group B), FSI < 1 and T-score total hip > -1.0 SD (Group C) in the East Slovak female population. 3. To determine, if FSI variable value is a significant predictor of BMD variable values in lumbar vertebrae.

Results:
1. In the East Slovak female population we can expect 14.54% of women with FSI values < 1 and 6.25% of women with osteoporosis in the total hip area according to T-score. 2. For the group A we can expect the mean value (μ) from interval (1.41; 2.36) %, for the group B from interval (4.50; 6.03) % and for the group C from interval (6.76; 8.55) %. 3. Between FSI and BMD L1-L4 variable values there is not a statistically significant dependence, because FSI variable is quantitative and qualitative different variable from BMD variable.

Conclusion:
The measurement of FSI variable values may discover a higher percentage of women with a probability of femoral neck fracture by fall than the measurement of BMD variable value in the total hip area. Patient with osteopenia or normal BMD measured in the total hip area may sustain a femoral neck fracture by fall, when she has pathological value of FSI, i.e. she has adverse values of geometric variables of proximal femur (biomechanically unfavourable proximal femur configuration). FSI variable value is not a significant predictor of BMD variable values in lumbar vertebrae L1-L4.

Keywords: osteoporosis; femur strength index (FSI); bone mineral density (BMD); femoral neck fracture; dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA); lumbar vertebrae

Received: May 12, 2010; Published: July 1, 2010  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Wendlová J. Femur strength index versus bone mineral density: new findings (Slovak epidemiological etudy). Vnitr Lek. 2010;56(7):764-770.
Download citation

References

  1. Pietschmann P, Kerschan-Schindl K. Knochenqualität - wissenschaftliche Aspekte versus praktische Relevanz. J Miner Stoffwechs 2004; 11: 16-18.
  2. Boonen S, Singer AJ. Osteoporosis management: impact of fracture type on cost and quality of life in patient at risk for fracture I. Curr Med Res Opin 2008; 24: 1781-1788. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Viktoria Stein K, Dorner TH, Lawrence K et al. Economic concepts for measuring the costs of illness of osteoporosis: An international comparison. Wien Med Wochenschr 2009; 159: 253-261. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Finnern HW, Sykes DP. The hospital cost of vertebral fractures in the EU: estimates using national data sets. Osteoporos Int 2003; 14: 429-436. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Lindsay R, Burge RT, Strauss DM. One year outcomes and costs following a vertebral fracture. Osteoporos Int 2005; 16: 78-85. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Jahelka B, Dorner T, Terkula R et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with osteopenia or osteoporosis with and without fractures in a geriatric rehabilitation department. Wien Med Wochenschr 2009; 159: 235-240. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. Rabenda V, Manette C, Lemmens R et al. The direct and indirect costs of the chronic management of osteoporosis: a prospective follow-up of 3440 active subjects. Osteoporos Int 2006; 17: 1346-1352. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Nakamura T, Turner CH, Yoshikawa T et al. Do variations in hip geometry explain differences in hip fracture risk between Japanese and white Americans? J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9: 1071-1076. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Rublíková E, Labudová V, Sandtnerová S. Analysis of categorical data. 1st ed. Bratislava: Publishing house Economic University 2009: 41-141.
  10. Pacáková V. Statistical methods for economists. 2nd ed. Bratislava: Publishing House: Iura Edition 2009: 174-177.
  11. Varga S. Another View on the Fuzzy Regression. Forum Statisticum Slovacum 2009; 3: 1-7.
  12. Pacáková V. Aplikovaná poistná štatistika. 1 vyd. Bratislava: Publishing House: IURA Edition 2004: 67-86.
  13. Varga Š. Fuzzy predictions in regression models. J Appl Mathem Open Access 2010; 3: 245-251.
  14. Kukla C, Gaebler C, Pichl RW et al. Predictive geometric factors in a standardized model of femoral neck fracture. Experimental study of cadaveric human femurs. Injury 2002; 33: 427-433. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  15. Gregory JS, Testi D, Stewart A et al. A method for assessment of the shape of the proximal femur and its relationship to osteoporotic hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 2004; 15: 5-11. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Alonso CG, Curiel MD, Carranza FH et al. Femoral bone mineral density, neck shaft angle and mean femoral neck with as predictors of hip fracture in men and women. Multicenter Project for Research in Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2000; 11: 714-720. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  17. El Kaissi S, Pasco JA, Henry MJ et al. Femoral neck geometry and hip fracture risk: the Geelong osteoporosis study. Osteoporos Int 2005; 16: 1299-1303. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  18. Watts NB. Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporos Int 2004; 15: 847-854. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  19. Gnudi S, Malavolta N, Testi D et al. Differences in proximal femur geometry distinguish vertebral from femoral neck fractures in osteoporotic women. Br J Radiol 2004; 77: 219-223. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Gnudi S, Ripamonti C, Lisi L et al. Proximal femur geometry to detect and distinguish femoral neck fractures from trochanteric fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13: 69-73. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  21. Faulkner KG, Wacker WK, Barden HS et al. Femur strength index predicts hip fracture independent of bone density and hip axis length. Osteoporos Int 2006; 17: 593-599. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  22. Crabtree N, Lunt M, Holt G et al. Hip geometry, bone mineral distribution, and bone strength in European men and women: The EPOS study. Bone 2000; 27: 151-159. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  23. Wendlova J. Logistic regression in estimate of femoral neck fracture by fall. Open Access Emergency Medicine 2010; 2: 29-36. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  24. Wendlova J. Expected frequency of femoral neck fractures by fall in the osteoporotic and osteopenic East Slovak female population. (Epidemiological Study). Wien Med Wochenschr 2010; 159. V tisku. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  25. Wendlová J. Why is so important to balance the muscular dysbalance in mm. coxae area in osteoporotic patients? Bratisl lek listy 2008; 109: 502-507. Go to PubMed...
  26. Cheng X, Li J, Lu Y, et al. Proximal femoral density and geometry measurements by quantitative computed tomography: association with hip fracture. Bone 2007; 40: 169-174. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  27. Manske SL, Liu-Ambrose T, De Bakker PM et al. Femoral neck cortical geometry measured with magnetic resonance imaging is associated with proximal femur strength. Osteoporos Int 2006; 17: 1539-1545. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  28. Bousson V, Le Bras A, Roqueplan F et al. Volumetric quantitative computed tomography of the proximal femur: relationships linking geometric and densitometric variables to bone strength. Role for compact bone. Osteoporos Int 2006; 17: 855-864. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  29. Engelke K, Adams JE, Armbrecht G et al. Clinical Use of Quantitative Computed Tomography and Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography in the Management of Osteoporosis in adults. The 2007 ICSD Official Position. J Clin Densit 2008; 11: 123-162. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  30. Sipos W, Pietschmann P, Rauner M et al. Pathophysiology of osteoporosis. Wien Med Wochenschr 2009; 159: 230-234. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...




Vnitřní lékařství

Madam, Sir,
please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

I declare:

  1. that I have met the above instruction
  2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited


No

Yes

If your statement is not true, please be aware
that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.