Search

A vertebral fracture is a marker of bone fragility and is associated with a downward spiral of recurrent fractures known as the vertebral fracture cascade. Etiology of this unfortunate cascade includes bone and muscle loss from immobility, changes in spinal mechanics causing increased loading on adjacent vertebrae, and the development of an increased thoracic kyphosis (hyperkyphosis [HK]). Degenerative disc disease, common in osteoporotic patients, can also cause HK. HK of any etiology has been associated with decreased thoracic extensor muscle strength, unstable gait, increased body sway, decreased physical and pulmonary functions, chronic pain, and increased spinal loads contributing to the vertebral fracture cascade. Preventing this downward spiral requires a multidisciplinary approach that includes early identification, consideration of pharmacologic treatment, early mobilization of the fracture patient, appropriate exercise, and back protection. Exercise should include weight-bearing and muscle-strengthening activities, but caution is needed to avoid undue stress on the back. Physical therapy can be particularly helpful by teaching the patient how to safely perform daily activities and can assist the patient in establishing a safe exercise program that avoids flexion but promotes back extension and weight-bearing activities. Hopefully, these measures will decrease pain, prevent falls, improve posture, prevent additional bone and muscle loss, and potentially abort the devastating downward spiral of the vertebral fracture cascade.

Bisphosphonates such as alendronate are widely used for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Supplemental calcium is also generally recommended. This trial directly compares alendronate to supplemental calcium and examines the effect of calcium supplementation on alendronate treatment.This 2-year, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial enrolled healthy, postmenopausal women with low bone mineral density (BMD). Patients with a dietary calcium intakeor = 800 mg/day received daily vitamin D 400 IU and alendronate 10 mg/calcium-placebo, alendronate 10 mg/elemental calcium 1000 mg, or alendronate-placebo/calcium 1000 mg (2:2:1). Endpoints included BMD, bone turnover markers (BTMs), and adverse events.Randomized patients (N = 701) were an average of 20.4 years postmenopausal. After 24 months, increases in lumbar spine BMD differed significantly between patients receiving calcium alone (0.8%) and either alendronate alone (5.6%) or alendronate + calcium (6.0%) (p0.001). Significant differences were also seen at the trochanter and femoral neck (p0.001). BTMs were significantly lower with alendronate-containing treatments than calcium alone (p0.001). Addition of calcium supplementation to alendronate did not significantly increase BMD compared to alendronate alone (p = 0.29 to 0.97), but did result in a statistically significant, though small, additional reduction in urinary NTx. Adverse events were similar among treatment groups. Limitations include no assessment of vitamin D levels and a discontinuation rate of approximately 30%, although discontinuation rates were similar among treatment groups.In postmenopausal women with a daily intake ofor =800 mg calcium and 400 IU vitamin D, 24-month treatment with alendronate 10 mg daily with or without calcium 1000 mg resulted in significantly greater increases in BMD and reduction of bone turnover than supplemental calcium alone. Addition of supplemental calcium to alendronate treatment had no effect on BMD and resulted in a small, though statistically significant, additional reduction in NTx.

There have been many scientific advances in fracture risk prediction beyond bone density. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) convened a Position Development Conference (PDC) on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry beyond measurement of bone mineral density for fracture risk assessment, including trabecular bone score and hip geometry measures. Previously, no guidelines for nonbone mineral density DXA measures existed. Furthermore, there have been advances in the analysis of quantitative computed tomography (QCT) including finite element analysis, QCT of the hip, DXA-equivalent hip measurements, and opportunistic screening that were not included in the previous ISCD positions. The topics and questions for consideration were developed by the ISCD Board of Directors and the Scientific Advisory Committee and were designed to address the needs of clinical practitioners. Three task forces were created and asked to conduct comprehensive literature reviews to address specific questions. The task forces included participants from many countries and a variety of interests including academic institutions and private health care delivery organizations. Representatives from industry participated as consultants to the task forces. Task force reports with proposed position statements were then presented to an international panel of experts with backgrounds in bone densitometry. The PDC was held in Chicago, Illinois, USA, contemporaneously with the Annual Meeting of the ISCD, February 26 through February 28, 2015. This Executive Summary describes the methodology of the 2015 PDC on advanced measures from DXA and QCT and summarizes the approved official positions. Six separate articles in this issue will detail the rationale, discussion, and additional research topics for each question the task forces addressed.

Conventional dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry images display a digital projection of the inorganic mineral mass in a scanned region. Bone mineral density software generates an average of the pixels within one or more regions. Although not used in the conventional analysis, the images also contain dimensional information limited to the plane of the image. The hip structure analysis method and that of the similar GE, Madison, WI, algorithm Advanced Hip Analysis use both the dimensional information and the mineral mass data to compute the types of dimensional properties (i.e., geometry) that are used to evaluate mechanical strength in engineering analyses. This article describes the hip structure analysis method and a somewhat cruder geometry approximation that does not require a reanalysis of the image. Limitations of the methods are discussed.

Bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is the current imaging procedure of choice to assess fracture risk. However, BMD is only one of the factors that explain bone strength or resistance to fracture. Other factors include bone microarchitecture and macroarchitecture. We now have the ability to assess some of these non-BMD parameters from a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry image. Available measurements include various measurements of hip geometry including hip structural analysis, hip axis length, and neck-shaft angle. At the 2015 Position Development Conference, the International Society of Clinical Densitometry established official positions for the clinical utility of measurements of hip geometry. We present the official positions approved by an expert panel after careful review of the recommendations and evidence prepared by an independent task force. Each question addressed by the task force is presented followed by the official position with the associated medical evidence and rationale.

Bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. However, BMD explains only 60%-80% of bone strength, and a number of skeletal features other than BMD contribute to bone strength and fracture risk. Advanced imaging modalities can assess some of these skeletal features, but compared to standard DXA, these techniques have higher costs and limited accessibility. A major challenge, therefore, has been to incorporate in clinical practice a readily available, noninvasive technology that permits improvement in fracture-risk prediction beyond that provided by the combination of standard DXA measurements and clinical risk factors. To this end, trabecular bone score (TBS), a gray-level textural index derived from the lumbar spine DXA image, has been investigated. The purpose of this International Society for Clinical Densitometry task force was to review the evidence and develop recommendations on how to incorporate TBS in clinical practice. Clinical applications of TBS for fracture risk assessment, treatment initiation, monitoring of treatment, and use of TBS in special conditions related to greater fracture risk, were addressed. We present the official positions approved by an expert panel following careful review of the recommendations and evidence presented by the TBS task force.

Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA) is a low radiation method for imaging the thoraco-lumbar spine using bone densitometers. VFA can easily be performed at the time of bone mineral density (BMD) measurement, allowing integration of BMD and vertebral fracture information into clinical patient care. As VFA is a relatively new procedure, it has received limited study and heretofore has not had widespread clinical application. Consequently, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) considered the following VFA issues at the 2005 Position Development Conference: (1) indications for VFA; (2) methodology for the diagnosis of vertebral fractures using VFA; and (3) indications for additional imaging after VFA. The ISCD Official Positions with respect to the above issues, as well as the rationale and evidence used to derive these positions, are presented here.

Once-weekly alendronate 70 mg and once-weekly risedronate 35 mg are indicated for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. These two agents were compared in a 12-month head-to-head trial. Greater gains in BMD and greater reductions in markers of bone turnover were seen with alendronate compared with risedronate with similar tolerability. Introduction: The nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates, alendronate and risedronate, are available in once-weekly (OW) formulations for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. A 12-month, head-to-head study was performed to compare these agents in the treatment of postmenopausal women with low BMD. Materials and Methods: A total of 1053 patients from 78 U.S. sites were randomized to OW alendronate 70 mg (N = 520) or risedronate 35 mg (N = 533), taken in the morning after fasting. Endpoints included BMD changes over 6 and 12 months at the hip trochanter, total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine (LS); percent of patients with predefined levels of change in trochanter and LS BMD at 12 months; and change in biochemical markers of bone turnover at 3, 6, and 12 months. Tolerability was evaluated by adverse experience (AE) reporting. Results: Significantly greater increases in hip trochanter BMD were seen with alendronate (3.4%) than risedronate (2.1%) at 12 months (treatment difference, 1.4%; p < 0.001) as well as 6 months (treatment difference, 1.3%; p < 0.001). Significantly greater gains in BMD were seen with alendronate at all BMD sites measured (12-month difference: total hip, 1.0%; femoral neck, 0.7%; LS, 1.2%). Significant differences were seen as early as 6 months at all sites. A greater percentage of patients had ≥0% (p < 0.001) and ≥3% (p < 0.01) gain in trochanter and spine BMD at 12 months with alendronate than risedronate. Significantly greater (p < 0.001) reductions in all biochemical markers of bone turnover occurred with alendronate compared with risedronate by 3 months. No significant differences were seen between treatment groups in the incidence of upper gastrointestinal AEs or AEs causing discontinuation. Conclusions: In this 12-month, head-to-head trial of alendronate and risedronate, given in accordance with the approved OW regimens for treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, alendronate produced greater gains in BMD and greater reductions in markers of bone turnover than risedronate. The greater antiresorptive effect of alendronate was seen as early as 3 months, and the tolerability profiles were similar.

Osteoporosis was first recognized as a systemic disease in 1990 when a consensus development conference defined osteoporosis as “a systemic skeletal disease” that leads to an increased “susceptibility to fracture”. In other words, osteoporosis is the disease; fracture is the sequelae. Since then, we have made major advances in understanding the epidemiology of this common and chronic disease, elucidating its pathophysiology, identifying its significant effect on cost, morbidity, and mortality of the consequent fractures. In addition, a number of pharmacologic agents have been developed that have been proven effective in preventing the disease and its sequelae (i.e., fracture). As with any chronic systemic disease, however, management of the patient requires more than pharmaceuticals. Appropriate treatment requires a comprehensive management program that includes both fracture prevention and management of symptoms such as pain, decreased mobility, decreased function, social isolation, and depression. This requires a multidisciplinary approach involving many health professionals including physical therapists.

Rheumatoid arthritis is the only secondary cause of osteoporosis that is considered independent of bone density in the FRAX(®) algorithm. Although input for rheumatoid arthritis in FRAX(®) is a dichotomous variable, intuitively, one would expect that more severe or active disease would be associated with a greater risk for fracture. We reviewed the literature to determine if specific disease parameters or medication use could be used to better characterize fracture risk in individuals with rheumatoid arthritis. Although many studies document a correlation between various parameters of disease activity or severity and decreased bone density, fewer have associated these variables with fracture risk. We reviewed these studies in detail and concluded that disability measures such as HAQ (Health Assessment Questionnaire) and functional class do correlate with clinical fractures but not morphometric vertebral fractures. One large study found a strong correlation with duration of disease and fracture risk but additional studies are needed to confirm this. There was little evidence to correlate other measures of disease such as DAS (disease activity score), VAS (visual analogue scale), acute phase reactants, use of non-glucocorticoid medications and increased fracture risk. We concluded that FRAX(®) calculations may underestimate fracture probability in patients with impaired functional status from rheumatoid arthritis but that this could not be quantified at this time. At this time, other disease measures cannot be used for fracture prediction. However only a few, mostly small studies addressed other disease parameters and further research is needed. Additional questions for future research are suggested.

Osteoporosis is a common skeletal disease that weakens bones and increases the risk of fractures. It affects about one half of women over the age of 60, and one third of older men. With appropriate care, osteoporosis can be prevented; and when present, it can be easily diagnosed and managed. Unfortunately, many patients with osteoporosis are not recognized or treated, even after sustaining a low-trauma fracture. Even when treatment is initiated, patients may not take medication correctly, regularly, or for a sufficient amount of time to receive the benefit of fracture risk reduction. Efforts to improve compliance and treatment outcomes include longer dosing intervals and parenteral administration. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis have been developed by the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) but may not be fully utilized by clinicians who must deal with numerous healthcare priorities. We present an algorithm to help streamline the work of busy clinicians so they can efficiently provide state-of-the-art care to patients with osteoporosis.

This 6-mo open-label study assessed the pattern of bone turnover marker (BTM) level changes in bisphosphonate-naive women with postmenopausal osteoporosis treated with monthly oral ibandronate 150mg and the correlation between month 1 and month 6 serum C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type I collagen (sCTX) levels. The following BTMs were monitored: sCTX, urinary N-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (uNTX), serum procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide (PINP), serum osteocalcin (OC), and serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (bALP). BTM levels were measured immediately before dosing at baseline and months 1, 2, 3, and 6, and 7d after dosing at baseline and month 4. A multiple regression model was applied to determine whether month 1 sCTX response predicted month 6 sCTX change. sCTX levels declined 70% 7d after dosing at baseline and month 4. Predosing sCTX declined 55% at month 6. The pattern of uNTX reduction was similar to sCTX. Bone formation markers PINP, OC, and bALP declined gradually over time. Month 1 sCTX change was a significant predictor of Month 6 change ( p =0.0001). Once monthly 150mg oral ibandronate treatment reduced BTMs in women with osteoporosis. sCTX reduction occurred within 7d and was sustained over 6mo. Month 1 sCTX predicted month 6 sCTX.

Objective To determine whether hip fracture patients, a group at very high risk for additional fragility fractures, are being evaluated and treated effectively for osteoporosis. Methods Clinical and bone densitometry (dual x-ray absorptiometry [DXA]) records were reviewed in hip fracture patients at 4 Midwestern US health systems to determine the frequency of DXA use, calcium and vitamin D supplementation, and antiresorptive drug treatment. Results DXA was performed at the 4 study sites in only 12%, 12%, 13%, and 24% of patients, respectively. Calcium and vitamin D supplements were prescribed in 27%, 1%, 3%, and 25% of the patients at the 4 study sites. Antiresorptive drugs were prescribed in 26%, 12%, 7%, and 37% of the patients with only 2–10% receiving a bisphosphonate. Conclusion Reducing osteoporotic fractures will require more effective approaches to managing hip fracture patients and other high-risk populations.

CONTEXT: Vertebral fractures significantly increase lifetime risk of future fractures, but risk of further vertebral fractures in the period immediately following a vertebral fracture has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of further vertebral fracture in the year following a vertebral fracture. DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of data from 4 large 3-year osteoporosis treatment trials conducted at 373 study centers in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand from November 1993 to April 1998. SUBJECTS: Postmenopausal women who had been randomized to a placebo group and for whom vertebral fracture status was known at entry (n = 2725). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Occurrence of radiographically identified vertebral fracture during the year following an incident vertebral fracture. RESULTS: Subjects were a mean age of 74 years and had a mean of 28 years since menopause. The cumulative incidence of new vertebral fractures in the first year was 6.6%. Presence of 1 or more vertebral fractures at baseline increased risk of sustaining a vertebral fracture by 5-fold during the initial year of the study compared with the incidence in subjects without prevalent vertebral fractures at baseline (relative risk [RR], 5.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-8.4; P

Acute infectious arthritis remains a clinical emergency where early diagnosis and appropriate therapy are essential to a successful outcome. The therapeutic requirements for a successful outcome include early diagnosis, appropriate antibiotics, joint mobilization and adequate drainage. The method of drainage can be medical with needle aspiration or surgical with arthroscopic or open surgical debridement. The literature review presented in this chapter supports the value of the initial use of medical therapy in the management of the acutely infected joint, with surgical drainage reserved for failure of medical management or for initial drainage of hip infections where needle aspiration is difficult.