Ha Yong-Chan, Yoo Jun-Il, Yoo Jeongkyun, Park Ki Soo
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul 06974, Korea.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, Jinju 52727, Korea.
J Clin Med. 2019 Sep 20;8(10):1507. doi: 10.3390/jcm8101507.
The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the hip structural analysis (HSA) levels of patients with those of a hip fracture group. All patients with an initial hip fracture who were older than or equal to 65 years old and admitted to our hospital between March 2018 and January 2019 were eligible for this study. During the study period, 134 hip fracture patients aged 65 years and older were admitted to the study institution, and a total of 51 hip fracture patients were ultimately assigned to the patient group. Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), skeletal muscle index (SMI), and vitamin D were matched in the two groups (hip fracture (HF) group vs. non-hip fracture group) using propensity score matching (PSM) without any statistical differences. Following propensity score matching, 51 patients in the HF group and 51 patients in the non-HF group were included in the study, respectively. Hip axis length ( = 0.031), neck-shaft angle ( = 0.043), width of intertrochanter ( = 0.005), and femur shaft ( = 0.01) were found to be significantly higher in the HF group (107.31 (mean) ± 9.55 (standard deviation, SD), 131.11 ± 5.29, 5.57 ± 0.58, and 3.05 ± 0.23, respectively) than in the non-HF group (102.07 ± 14.15, 128.85 ± 5.81, 5.29 ± 0.38, and 2.92 ± 0.23, respectively). However, cross-sectional area (CSA) of femur neck ( = 0.005) and femur shaft ( = 0.01) as well as cortical thickness (CT) of femur neck ( = 0.031) and femur shaft ( = 0.031) were found to be significantly lower in the HF group (1.93 ± 0.44, 3.18 ± 0.83, 0.11 ± 0.02, and 0.38 ± 0.09, respectively) than in the non-HF group (2.12 ± 0.46, 3.57 ± 0.78, 0.13 ± 0.03, and 0.47 ± 0.11, respectively). The HSA showed excellent sensitivity (82.4% to 90.2%). HSA is an important factor in predicting the occurrence of hip fracture. Therefore, not only should bone mineral density (BMD) be considered clinically, but it is also important to look closely at HSA for risk of hip fracture.
本回顾性研究的目的是比较患者与髋部骨折组的髋部结构分析(HSA)水平。2018年3月至2019年1月期间,所有年龄大于或等于65岁且因初次髋部骨折入住我院的患者均符合本研究条件。研究期间,134例65岁及以上的髋部骨折患者被纳入研究机构,最终共有51例髋部骨折患者被分配至患者组。两组(髋部骨折(HF)组与非髋部骨折组)采用倾向得分匹配(PSM)法进行年龄、性别、体重指数(BMI)、骨骼肌指数(SMI)和维生素D匹配,无任何统计学差异。倾向得分匹配后,HF组51例患者和非HF组51例患者分别纳入研究。结果发现,HF组的髋轴长度(=0.031)、颈干角(=0.043)、大转子间宽度(=0.005)和股骨干(=0.01)显著高于非HF组(分别为107.31(均值)±9.55(标准差,SD)、131.11±5.29、5.57±0.58和3.05±0.23)(分别为102.07±14.15、128.85±5.81、5.29±0.38和2.92±0.23)。然而,HF组的股骨颈横截面积(CSA)(=0.005)和股骨干(=0.01)以及股骨颈皮质厚度(CT)(=0.031)和股骨干(=0.031)显著低于非HF组(分别为1.93±0.44、3.18±0.83、0.11±0.02和0.38±0.09)(分别为2.12±0.46、3.57±0.78、0.13±0.03和0.47±0.11)。HSA显示出优异的敏感性(82.4%至90.2%)。HSA是预测髋部骨折发生的重要因素。因此,临床上不仅应考虑骨密度(BMD),密切关注HSA对髋部骨折风险也很重要。