Suppr超能文献

使用T值进行患者分类时的不一致性。

Discordance in patient classification using T-scores.

作者信息

Faulkner K G, von Stetten E, Miller P

机构信息

Synarc Portland, Portland, OR 97220, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Densitom. 1999 Fall;2(3):343-50. doi: 10.1385/jcd:2:3:343.

Abstract

In their original study report, "Assessment of Fracture Risk and Its Application to Screening for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis," the World Health Organization (WHO) explicitly stated that any T-score criterion for osteoporosis is sensitive to bone mineral density (BMD) measurement site and technique, as well as the young adult reference population. Yet, the T = -2.5 criterion introduced by WHO is used for many different BMD techniques, despite the fact that it was based primarily on the relationship between forearm measurements and prevalent hip fracture in postmenopausal Caucasian females. It is reasonable to expect that a T-score threshold of -2.5 may be inappropriate for different skeletal sites and measurement techniques. This may explain the large variation in osteoporosis prevalence observed when different skeletal sites are measured. In this study, we compared the prevalence of osteoporosis (based on the T = -2.5 criterion) at different skeletal sites using the manufacturer's normative data. We determined the expected mean T-score for a 60-yr-old Caucasian female at the heel (ultrasound), hip (dual X-ray absorptiometry [DXA]), spine (PA DXA, lateral DXA, and quantitative computed tomography [QCT]), and forearm (DXA). Assuming a normal distribution of T-scores at a fixed age, we computed the expected percentage of 60-yr-old Caucasian women that would be classified as osteoporotic using the -2.5 standard deviation criterion for each technique. At age 60 yr, the expected mean T-score ranged from -2.5 (spine QCT) to -0.7 (heel). Prevalence estimates ranged from 3% at the heel to 50% for spinal QCT. It was also noted that the sites with the strongest relationship to hip fracture risk (the hip and heel) showed the least age-related T-score decline and lowest estimated prevalence. We conclude that a single T-score criterion cannot be universally applied to all BMD measurements. The discrepancies in the prevalence of osteoporosis are the result of several factors, including differences in age-related bone loss at different skeletal sites, differences in the young adult reference populations used by the various bone densitometry devices, and technology-related differences. Using estimated BMD by heel ultrasound, few patients will have T-scores below -2.5, whereas most postmenopausal women will fall below this level for spine bone density measurements performed by lateral DXA or QCT. Based on these data, it may be necessary to provide a T-score criterion specific to the type of densitometric evaluation performed.

摘要

在其最初的研究报告《骨折风险评估及其在绝经后骨质疏松症筛查中的应用》中,世界卫生组织(WHO)明确指出,任何骨质疏松症的T值标准都对骨矿物质密度(BMD)测量部位和技术以及年轻成人参考人群敏感。然而,WHO引入的T = -2.5标准被用于许多不同的BMD技术,尽管它主要基于绝经后白人女性前臂测量与髋部骨折患病率之间的关系。可以合理预期,-2.5的T值阈值可能不适用于不同的骨骼部位和测量技术。这可能解释了在测量不同骨骼部位时观察到的骨质疏松症患病率的巨大差异。在本研究中,我们使用制造商的标准数据比较了不同骨骼部位骨质疏松症的患病率(基于T = -2.5标准)。我们确定了一名60岁白人女性在足跟(超声)、髋部(双能X线吸收法[DXA])、脊柱(后前位DXA、侧位DXA和定量计算机断层扫描[QCT])和前臂(DXA)的预期平均T值。假设在固定年龄T值呈正态分布,我们计算了使用每种技术的-2.5标准差标准将被归类为骨质疏松症的60岁白人女性的预期百分比。在60岁时,预期平均T值范围从-2.5(脊柱QCT)到-0.7(足跟)。患病率估计范围从足跟的3%到脊柱QCT的50%。还注意到与髋部骨折风险关系最密切的部位(髋部和足跟)显示出与年龄相关的T值下降最少且估计患病率最低。我们得出结论,单一的T值标准不能普遍适用于所有BMD测量。骨质疏松症患病率的差异是由多种因素造成的,包括不同骨骼部位与年龄相关的骨质流失差异、各种骨密度测量设备所使用的年轻成人参考人群的差异以及技术相关的差异。使用足跟超声估计BMD,很少有患者的T值会低于-2.5,而对于通过侧位DXA或QCT进行的脊柱骨密度测量,大多数绝经后女性的T值会低于该水平。基于这些数据,可能有必要针对所进行的骨密度评估类型提供特定的T值标准。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验