McCloskey E V, Spector T D, Eyres K S, Fern E D, O'Rourke N, Vasikaran S, Kanis J A
WHO Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Disease, University of Sheffield, UK.
Osteoporos Int. 1993 May;3(3):138-47. doi: 10.1007/BF01623275.
The absence of specific criteria for the definition of vertebral fracture has major implications for assessing the apparent prevalence and incidence of vertebral deformity. Also, little is known of the effect of using different criteria for new vertebral fractures in clinical studies. We therefore developed radiological criteria for vertebral fracture in women for assessing both the prevalence and the incidence of vertebral osteoporosis in population and in prospective studies and compared these with several other published methods. Normal ranges for vertebral shape were obtained from radiographs in 100 women aged 45-50 years. These included ranges for the ratios of anterior/posterior, central/posterior and posterior/predicted posterior vertebral heights from T4 to L5. The predicted posterior height was calculated from adjacent vertebrae. In contrast to other methods, our definition of fracture required the fulfillment of two criteria at each vertebral site, and was associated with a lower apparent prevalence of fracture in the control women due to a lower false positive rate. The prevalence and incidence of vertebral deformity using different criteria were then compared in a series of women with skeletal metastases from breast cancer in whom radiographs were obtained 6 months apart. The prevalence of vertebral deformity and the specificity for deformity varied markedly with differing criteria. Using a cut-off of 3 standard deviations the prevalence of vertebral deformity in the women with breast cancer was 46%. Using other methods, the prevalences of deformity ranged from 33% to 74%. Over a 6-month interval 25% of patients with breast cancer sustained 61 deformities using our method, of which only 8% resulted from errors in reproducibility. The number of patients sustaining new deformities was increased twofold when assessed by other methods (45%-53%), but errors of reproducibility may have accounted for 21% of the new deformities. The magnitude and distribution of these errors have important implications for the apparent therapeutic efficacy of agents in clinical trials of osteoporosis. The rapid semi-automated technique for assessing vertebral deformities on lateral spine radiographs that we have developed has a high specificity, and reduces the impact of errors of reproducibility on estimates of prevalence and incidence. The method should prove a value in assessing vertebral deformity both in population studies and in prospective clinical trials.
缺乏椎体骨折的明确定义标准对评估椎体畸形的表观患病率和发病率有重大影响。此外,对于在临床研究中使用不同标准来判定新发椎体骨折的影响,人们了解甚少。因此,我们制定了女性椎体骨折的放射学标准,用于评估人群和前瞻性研究中椎体骨质疏松的患病率和发病率,并将其与其他几种已发表的方法进行比较。从100名45至50岁女性的X光片中获取椎体形状的正常范围。这些范围包括从T4至L5椎体的前/后、中央/后以及后/预测后高度的比值。预测后高度是根据相邻椎体计算得出的。与其他方法不同,我们对骨折的定义要求每个椎体部位满足两个标准,并且由于假阳性率较低,在对照女性中骨折的表观患病率也较低。然后,在一系列患有乳腺癌骨转移的女性中比较了使用不同标准时椎体畸形的患病率和发病率,这些女性每隔6个月拍摄一次X光片。椎体畸形的患病率和畸形特异性因标准不同而有显著差异。采用3个标准差的临界值时,乳腺癌女性中椎体畸形的患病率为46%。使用其他方法时,畸形患病率在33%至74%之间。在6个月的间隔期内,使用我们的方法,25%的乳腺癌患者出现了61处畸形,其中只有8%是由重复性误差导致的。用其他方法评估时,出现新畸形的患者数量增加了两倍(45% - 53%),但重复性误差可能占新畸形的21%。这些误差的大小和分布对骨质疏松症临床试验中药物的表观治疗效果有重要影响。我们开发的用于在脊柱侧位X光片上评估椎体畸形的快速半自动技术具有很高的特异性,并减少了重复性误差对患病率和发病率估计的影响。该方法在人群研究和前瞻性临床试验中评估椎体畸形时应具有价值。