Does regional loss of bone density explain low trauma distal forearm fractures in men (the Mr F study)?

Hanusch, Birgit; Tuck, Stephen; McNally, Richard J.Q.; Wu, Junjie; Prediger, M.; Walker, Julie; Tang, Jonathan; Piec, Isabelle; Fraser, William D.; Datta, Harish K.; Francis, Roger M.

doi:10.1007/s00198-017-4122-0

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kass et al (2012) reported in a case control study on 35 patients with distal forearm fracture and 57 controls in women older than 50 years old who reported that the distal posterior osteoporosis could increase the risk of fracture in that area [11]. Hanusch et al, in 2016 in a case control study, on 61 men with distal posterior fracture of mild trauma and 59 men in control group showed that the BMD of the distal forearm in the case group was significantly lower than the control group [8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Most centers in the world have used the densitometry of hip and spine (conventional method) to detect osteoporosis, but due to the high prevalence of distal forearm fracture and osteoporosis as its dominant etiology and on the other hand, the results of some studies have shown that the distal forearm densitometry is a good indicator for axial osteoporosis [5,6,7,8,9], it seems that the study of distal forearm bone density is very useful and valuable in addition to hip and spine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diagnostic Value of Distal Forearm Densitometry for Osteoporosis; Alone or Add to Hip and Spine Densitometry?

Moghimi

Rahmani

Rajabnia

2019

JPRI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:In most centers of the world, for diagnosing osteoporosis is used densitometry in hip and spine, but due to the high prevalence of distal forearm fracture and osteoporosis as its main etiology and on the other hand, evaluation of the distal forearm densitometry as an predictor indicator for axial osteoporosis, evaluate the diagnostic value of distal forearm densitometry for osteoporosis; alone and with adding to hip and spine densitometry. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive-analytic study was carried out on 250 patients referring to Sanandaj densitometry center from September 2017 to September 2018. For the studied subjects, BMD was performed by DXA method in three regions of hip, spine and distal forearm. Data were analyzed using independent t-test, fisher exact test, chi-square test and logistic regression test using SPSS v. 23 software. Results: In this study, 68 cases (27.2%) in the spine region, 38 cases (15.2%) in the hip and 85 cases (34%) in distal forearm were osteoporotic. Based on the results of this study, using the Moghimi et al.; JPRI, 27(3): 1-6, 2019; Article no.JPRI.48850 2 conventional method (hip and spine) in comparison with the studied method (hip, spine and distal forearm), 29 (11.6%) of those cases with osteoporosis are not diagnosed. Distal forearm densitometry alone in comparison with the conventional method has diagnostic sensitivity 74.66%, specificity 83.43%, positive predictive value (PPV) 65.88% and negative predictive value (NPV) 88.48%. Conclusion: Adding distal forearm densitometry to conventional method significantly increasing diagnostic sensitivity of osteoporosis and would prevent misdiagnosis. Distal forearm densitometry can use as a predictor indicator of axial osteoporosis. Original Research Article

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Value of Distal Forearm Densitometry for Osteoporosis; Alone or Add to Hip and Spine Densitometry?

Moghimi

Rahmani

Rajabnia

2019

JPRI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has published data on significantly lower BMD and a higher percentage of osteoporosis in men with these fractures compared with healthy age-matched control subjects [3]. The greatest percentage reduction in BMD occurred at the ultra distal forearm, which was also the best predictor of forearm fracture [3]. Here, we have used data from this study to test the hypothesis that men with distal forearm fractures may have lower BMD and increased fracture risk as a result of underlying higher bone turnover.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The Mr F study is designed to investigate the pathogenesis of distal forearm fractures in men. It has published data on significantly lower BMD and a higher percentage of osteoporosis in men with these fractures compared with healthy age-matched control subjects [3]. The greatest percentage reduction in BMD occurred at the ultra distal forearm, which was also the best predictor of forearm fracture [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lifetime risk of an osteoporotic fracture for a man over the age of 50 years is 1 in 5 and 30% of all hip fractures occur in men [1]. Previous studies have demonstrated that 42% of men with distal forearm fractures are osteoporotic [2] and that they have lower BMD at all sites compared to healthy men [3]. Men with these fractures have been demonstrated to have an increased risk of further fractures [1] and osteoporotic fractures in men, have an increased morbidity [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bone turnover markers as determinants of bone density and fracture in men with distal forearm fractures: the pathogenesis examined in the Mr F study

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pathogenesis for low-trauma wrist fractures in men is not fully understood.This study found that these men had evidence of significantly higher bone turnover compared with control subjects. Bone turnover markers were negative predictors of bone mineral density and were a predictor of fracture. ConclusionThe fracture group had significantly higher PINP and βCTX compared with the control group and these markers were negative predictors of aBMD at the total hip and forearm sites respectively. Sclerostin was a positive predictor of the variance of spinal and hip aBMD. Forearm fracture was best predicted by a combination of SHBG, PINP and ultra distal forearm aBMD. Findings of such cross-sectional data should be treated with caution, as longitudinal studies would be required to confirm or refute them.

show abstract

Associations between ultra-distal forearm bone mineral density and incident fracture in women

Holloway-Kew,

Betson,

Anderson

et al. 2024

Osteoporos Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Bone mineral density measured at the ultra-distal forearm site was associated with any fracture, as well as distal radius fracture in women from a longitudinal cohort study. Purpose Femoral neck (BMD hip ) and lumbar spine (BMD spine ) bone mineral density (BMD) are routinely used to assess fracture risk. More data are needed to understand how ultra-distal forearm BMD (BMD UDforearm ) may assist fracture prediction. Methods Using a Lunar DPX-L, Geelong Osteoporosis Study women ( n = 1026), aged 40–90 years, had BMD measured. Incident low-trauma fractures were radiologically verified. Using Cox proportional hazard models, hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for BMD UDforearm as a continuous variable (expressed as a one-unit decrease in T-score) and a categorical variable (normal/osteopenia/osteoporosis). Areas under receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curves were calculated. Analyses were conducted for any fracture and distal radius fractures. Results During 14,270 person-years of follow-up, there were 318 fractures (85 distal radius). In adjusted models, continuous BMD UDforearm was associated with any (HR 1.26;95%CI 1.15–1.39) and distal radius fractures (HR 1.59;95%CI 1.38–1.83). AUROCs for continuous BMD UDforearm , 33% forearm(BMD 33%forearm ), BMD hip , BMD spine , and FRAX without BMD were similar for any fracture ( p > 0.05). For distal radius fracture, the AUROC for BMD UDforearm was higher than other sites and FRAX ( p < 0.05). In adjusted models, those with osteoporosis had a higher likelihood of any fracture (HR 2.12; 95%CI 1.50–2.98). For distal radius fractures, both osteopenia and osteoporosis had a higher risk (HR 4.31; 95%CI 2.59–7.15 and 4.81; 95%CI 2.70–8.58). AUROCs for any fracture were similar for categorical BMD at all sites but lower for FRAX ( p < 0.05). For distal radius fractures, the AUROC for BMD UDforearm , was higher than other sites and FRAX ( p < 0.05). Conclusion Ultra-distal forearm BMD may aid risk assessments for any distal radius fractures. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00198-024-07041-4.

show abstract

Does regional loss of bone density explain low trauma distal forearm fractures in men (the Mr F study)?

Cited by 11 publications

References 35 publications

Diagnostic Value of Distal Forearm Densitometry for Osteoporosis; Alone or Add to Hip and Spine Densitometry?

Diagnostic Value of Distal Forearm Densitometry for Osteoporosis; Alone or Add to Hip and Spine Densitometry?

Bone turnover markers as determinants of bone density and fracture in men with distal forearm fractures: the pathogenesis examined in the Mr F study

Associations between ultra-distal forearm bone mineral density and incident fracture in women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About