vertebral fracture diagnostic methods, radiographic vertebral fracture assessment, osteoporosis fracture identification, spine imaging bone health, vertebral compression fracture diagnosis, bone density fracture risk, postmenopausal vertebral fracture, spinal fracture morphometry, fracture assessment methodology critique, radiological bone assessment
PMID 34674023 34674023 DOI 10.1007/s00198-021-06207-8 10.1007/s00198-021-06207-8
Cite this article
J C Prior, E H G Oei, J P Brown, L Oei, F Koromani, & B C Lentle (2021). Where's the break? Critique of radiographic vertebral fracture diagnostic methods. Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 32(12), 2391-2395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-021-06207-8
J C Prior, E H G Oei, J P Brown, L Oei, F Koromani, B C Lentle. Where's the break? Critique of radiographic vertebral fracture diagnostic methods. Osteoporos Int. 2021;32(12):2391-2395. doi:10.1007/s00198-021-06207-8
J C Prior, et al. "Where's the break? Critique of radiographic vertebral fracture diagnostic methods." Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, vol. 32, no. 12, 2021, pp. 2391-2395.
Vertebral fractures are the most common osteoporotic fracture, and patients with prevalent vertebral fractures have a greater risk of future fractures. However, radiographically determined vertebral fractures are not identified as a distinct risk factor in the World Health Organization (WHO) fracture risk assessment tool. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare potential risk factors including morphometric spine fracture status and the WHO risk factors for predicting 5-yr fracture risk. We hypothesized that spine fracture status provides prognostic information in addition to consideration of the WHO risk factors alone. A randomly selected, population-based community cohort of 2761 noninstitutionalized men and women > or =50 yr of age living within 50 km of one of nine regional centers was enrolled in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMOS), a prospective and longitudinal cohort study following subjects for 5 yr. Prevalent and incident spine fractures were identified from lateral spine radiographs. Incident nonvertebral fragility fractures were determined by an annual, mailed fracture questionnaire with validation, and nonvertebral fragility fracture was defined by investigators as a fracture with minimal trauma. A model considering the WHO risk factors plus spine fracture status provided greater prognostic information regarding future fracture risk than a model considering the WHO risk factors alone. In univariate analyses, age, BMD, and spine fracture status had the highest gradient of risk. A model considering these three risk factors captured almost all of the predictive information provided by a model considering spine fracture status plus the WHO risk factors and provided greater predictive information than a model considering the WHO risk factors alone. The use of spine fracture status along with age and BMD predicted future fracture risk with greater simplicity and higher prognostic accuracy than consideration of the risk factors included in the WHO tool.
Canadian women over 50 years old were studied over a 10-year period to see if those who sustained a fracture (caused by minimal trauma) were receiving the recommended osteoporosis therapy. We found that approximately half of these women were not being treated, indicating a significant care gap in osteoporosis treatment.
Prevalent fragility fracture strongly predicts future fracture. Previous studies have indicated that women with fragility fractures are not receiving the indicated treatment. We aimed to describe post fracture care in Canadian women using a large, population-based prospective cohort that began in 1995-1997. We followed 5,566 women over 50 years of age from across Canada over a period of 10 years in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Information on medication use and incident clinical fragility fractures was obtained during a yearly questionnaire or interview and fractures were confirmed by radiographic/medical reports. Over the 10-year study period, 42-56% of women with yearly incident clinical fragility fractures were not treated with an osteoporosis medication. During year 1 of the study, 22% of the women who had experienced a fragility fracture were on treatment with a bisphosphonate and 26% were on hormone therapy (HT). We were not able to differentiate HT use for menopause symptoms vs osteoporosis. Use of bisphosphonate therapy increased over time; odds ratio (OR) for use at year 10 compared to use at year 1 was 3.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.83-7.26). In contrast, HT use declined, with an OR of 0.07 (95%CI 0.02-0.24) at year 10 compared to year 1 of the study. In a large population-based cohort study, we found a therapeutic care gap in women with osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Although bisphosphonate therapy usage improved over time, a substantial gap remains.
Most premenopausal women with low trauma fracture(s) or low bone mineral density have a secondary cause of osteoporosis or bone loss. Where possible, treatment of the underlying cause should be the focus of management. Premenopausal women with an ongoing cause of bone loss and those who have had, or continue to have, low trauma fractures may require pharmacologic intervention. Clinical trials provide evidence of benefits of bisphosphonates and teriparatide for bone mineral density in several types of premenopausal osteoporosis, but studies are small and do not provide evidence regarding fracture risk reduction.
Population-based incident fracture data aid fracture prevention and therapy decisions. Our purpose was to describe 10-year site-specific cumulative fracture incidence by sex, age at baseline, and degree of trauma with/without consideration of competing mortality in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study adult cohort. Incident fractures and mortality were identified by annual postal questionnaires to the participant or proxy respondent. Date, site and circumstance of fracture were gathered from structured interviews and medical records. Fracture analyses were stratified by sex and age at baseline and used both Kaplan-Meier and competing mortality methods. The baseline (1995-97) cohort included 6314 women and 2789 men (aged 25-84 years; mean±SD 62±12 and 59±14, respectively), with 4322 (68%) women and 1732 (62%) men followed to year-10. At least one incident fracture occurred for 930 women (14%) and 247 men (9%). Competing mortality exceeded fracture risk for men aged 65+years at baseline. Age was a strong predictor of incident fractures especially fragility fractures, with higher age gradients for women vs. men. Major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) (hip, clinical spine, forearm, humerus) accounted for 41-74% of fracture risk by sex/age strata; in women all MOF sites showed age-related increases but in men only hip was clearly age-related. The most common fractures were the forearm for women and the ribs for men. Hip fracture incidence was the highest for the 75-84 year baseline age-group with no significant difference between women 7.0% (95% CI 5.3, 8.9) and men 7.0% (95% CI 4.4, 10.3). There are sex differences in the predominant sites and age-gradients of fracture. In older men, competing mortality exceeds cumulative fracture risk.