Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by RYAN, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by FOGELMAN, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by RYAN, P. J.
Right arrow Articles by FOGELMAN, I.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1994 British Society for Rheumatology

research-article

POST-MENOPAUSAL VERTEBRAL OSTEOPOROSIS: CAN DUAL ENERGY X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY FOREARM BONE DENSITY SUBSTITUTE FOR AXIAL MEASUREMENTS?

P. J. RYAN, G. M. BLAKE, R. HERD, J. PARKER and I. FOGELMAN

Department of Nuclear Medicine, Guy's Hospital St Thomas' Street, London SE1 9RT

Correspondence to: Correspondence to: P. J. Ryan, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medway Hospital, Windmill Road, Gillingham, Kent.

This study compared measurements of BMD using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at three sites in the nondominant forearm (ultradistal, distal one-third and a mid-region between these two), the lumbar spine (L1–L4) and the proximal femur (femoral neck, trochanter and Ward's triangle) for the evaluation of vertebral osteoporosis. Studies were performed on 100 normal women aged 29–69 yr (average 52 yr) and 63 osteoporotic women age 48–75 yr (average 66 yr) using the Hologic QDR– 1000.

Precision values of <1% were obtained in both normal and osteoporotic women at both forearm and axial sites. Z=scores for the osteoporotics [Z = (mean BMD normal — mean abnormal)/s.D.] were — 2.02 lumbar spine, –1.96 femoral neck, –1.79 ultradistal forearm, –1.73 mid region and –1.66 distal one-third forearm. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the lumbar spine and femoral neck equally discriminated between normals and osteoporotics with a 95% area under each curve, significantly greater values than those for the forearm which were 87% ultradistal, 89% mid forearm and 86% distal one-third forearm. Fracture thresholds, defined as the 90th centile of BMD for osteoporotic patients, were 1 s.D. below the normal mean for lumbar spine and femoral neck but equal to the mean for ultradistal, 0.6 S.D. below mean for mid region and 0.3 s.D. below mean for distal one-third region.

We conclude that for the discrimination of normals and osteoporotic women the three forearm sites are comparable. However, both lumbar spine and proximal femur BMD are superior to all forearm sites.

KEY WORDS: Spine, Vertebra, Femur, Bone mass, Fracture


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. Radiol.Home page
P J Ryan
Bone densitometry in the management of Colles' fractures: which site to measure?
Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2001; 74(888): 1137 - 1141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.