Osteoporosis‐related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first‐line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early post‐fracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease). © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Introduction Impaired bone microarchitecture is involved in vertebral fracture (VF) development among acromegaly patients. Aim of the study Comparison of DXA-derived bone parameters, areal BMD (aBMD), trabecular bone score (TBS) and 3D-SHAPER parameters in acromegaly patients with healthy controls. Methods This cross-sectional study evaluated acromegaly patients and a control group of healthy subjects. In all subjects, a single measurement of pituitary axis hormone levels, bone turnover markers, aBMD, (total hip (TH) and lumbar spine (LS)), TBS and 3D-SHAPER of the proximal femur region was performed. All subjects underwent DXA assessment of VF using the semiquantitative approach. Results One hundred six patients with acromegaly (mean age 56.6 years, BMI 30.2 kg/m2) and 104 control subjects (mean age 54.06 years, 28.4 BMI kg/m2) were included. After adjustment for weight, LS aBMD, TBS and TH trabecular volumetric BMD (vBMD) remained lower (P = 0.0048, <0.0001 and <0.0001, respectively) while cortical thickness (Cth) at TH and neck remained thicker (P = 0.006) in acromegaly patients compared with controls. The best multivariate model (model 1) discriminating patients with and without acromegaly included TBS, TH trabecular vBMD and TH Cth parameters (all P < 0.05). Twenty-two VFs (13 acromegaly subjects) were recognized. In these subjects after adjustment for age, FN aBMD, TH cortical sBMD and TH cortical vBMD remained significantly associated with the prevalent VF (OR = 2.69 (1.07–6.78), 2.84 (1.24–6.51) and 2.38 (1.11–5.10) for neck aBMD, TH cortical sBMD and TH cortical vBMD respectively)). The AUCs were similar for each parameter in this model. Conclusions Acromegaly patients, regardless of VF presence, have lower trabecular bone quantitative parameters, but those with VFs had decreased cortical density.

No abstract

Patients with diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of bone fractures. Several groups of effective antidiabetic drugs are available, which are very often given in combination. The effects of these medications on bone metabolism and fracture risk must not be neglected. Commonly used antidiabetic drugs might have a positive, neutral or negative impact on skeletal health. Increased risk of fracture has been identified with use of thiazolidinediones, most definitively in women. Also treatment with sulfonylureas can have adverse effects on bone. One consequence of these findings has been greater attention to fracture outcomes in trails of new diabetes medication (incretins and SGLT-2 inhibitors). The effect of insulin on bone is discussed and the risk of fractures in patients using insulin seems to be unrelated to insulin as itself. The aim of the review is to summarize effects of antidiabetic treatment on bone – bone mineral density, fractures and bone turnover markers. The authors also try to recommend a strategy how to treat patients with diabetes mellitus regarding the risk of osteoporotic fractures. In this review the problem of how to treat osteoporosis in patient with diabetes is also discussed.