Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis
- 865 Downloads
Meta-analysis of prospective studies shows that quantitative ultrasound of the heel using validated devices predicts risk of different types of fracture with similar performance across different devices and in elderly men and women. These predictions are independent of the risk estimates from hip DXA measures.
Clinical utilisation of heel quantitative ultrasound (QUS) depends on its power to predict clinical fractures. This is particularly important in settings that have no access to DXA-derived bone density measurements. We aimed to assess the predictive power of heel QUS for fractures using a meta-analysis approach.
We conducted an inverse variance random effects meta-analysis of prospective studies with heel QUS measures at baseline and fracture outcomes in their follow-up. Relative risks (RR) per standard deviation (SD) of different QUS parameters (broadband ultrasound attenuation [BUA], speed of sound [SOS], stiffness index [SI], and quantitative ultrasound index [QUI]) for various fracture outcomes (hip, vertebral, any clinical, any osteoporotic and major osteoporotic fractures) were reported based on study questions.
Twenty-one studies including 55,164 women and 13,742 men were included in the meta-analysis with a total follow-up of 279,124 person-years. All four QUS parameters were associated with risk of different fracture. For instance, RR of hip fracture for 1 SD decrease of BUA was 1.69 (95% CI 1.43–2.00), SOS was 1.96 (95% CI 1.64–2.34), SI was 2.26 (95%CI 1.71–2.99) and QUI was 1.99 (95% CI 1.49–2.67). There was marked heterogeneity among studies on hip and any clinical fractures but no evidence of publication bias amongst them. Validated devices from different manufacturers predicted fracture risks with similar performance (meta-regression p values > 0.05 for difference of devices). QUS measures predicted fracture with a similar performance in men and women. Meta-analysis of studies with QUS measures adjusted for hip BMD showed a significant and independent association with fracture risk (RR/SD for BUA = 1.34 [95%CI 1.22–1.49]).
This study confirms that heel QUS, using validated devices, predicts risk of different fracture outcomes in elderly men and women. Further research is needed for more widespread utilisation of the heel QUS in clinical settings across the world.
KeywordsDual-energy X-ray absorptiometry Meta-analysis Osteoporosis Quantitative ultrasound Risk assessment
We thank the organisers of the ISCD-IOF PDC for their support in making this study possible: Didier Hans (co-chair), Cyrus Cooper (co-chair), Sanford Baim, Bess Dawson-Hughes, John A Kanis, William D Leslie, Marjorie M Luckey, Rene Rizzoli, Catalina Poiana, John P Bilezekian (moderator), Socrates E Papapoulos (moderator).
Conflicts of interest
- 1.World Health Organization (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: 843Google Scholar
- 6.Krieg MA, Barkmann R, Gonnelli S, Stewart A, Bauer DC, Del Rio BL, Kaufman JJ, Lorenc R, Miller PD, Olszynski WP, Poiana C, Schott AM, Lewiecki EM, Hans D (2008) Quantitative ultrasound in the management of osteoporosis: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions. J Clin Densitom 11:163–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Engelke K, Adams JE, Armbrecht G, Augat P, Bogado CE, Bouxsein ML, Felsenberg D, Ito M, Prevrhal S, Hans DB, Lewiecki EM (2008) Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions. J Clin Densitom 11:123–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Cheng S, Hans D, Genant HK. (1999) Calcaneal quantitative ultrasound: Gel-coupled. 125–44Google Scholar
- 11.Njeh CF, Black DM. (1999) Calcaneal quantitative ultrasound: water-coupled. 109–24Google Scholar
- 13.Krieg MA, Cornuz J, Hartl F, Kraenzlin M, Tyndall A, Hauselmann HJ, Lippuner K, Rizzoli R, Buche D, Theiler R, Dambacher MA, Neff M, Pancaldi P, Tanzi F, Wimpfheimer K, Burckhardt P (2002) Quality controls for two heel bone ultrasounds used in the Swiss Evaluation of the Methods of Measurement of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk Study. J Clin Densitom 5:335–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Hans D, Durosier C, Kanis JA, Johansson H, Schott-Pethelaz AM, Krieg MA (2008) Assessment of the 10-year probability of osteoporotic hip fracture combining clinical risk factors and heel bone ultrasound: the EPISEM prospective cohort of 12,958 elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 23:1045–1051PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Krieg MA, Cornuz J, Ruffieux C, Van MG, Buche D, Dambacher MA, Hans D, Hartl F, Hauselmann HJ, Kraenzlin M, Lippuner K, Neff M, Pancaldi P, Rizzoli R, Tanzi F, Theiler R, Tyndall A, Wimpfheimer C, Burckhardt P (2006) Prediction of hip fracture risk by quantitative ultrasound in more than 7000 Swiss women > or =70 years of age: comparison of three technologically different bone ultrasound devices in the SEMOF study. J Bone Miner Res 21:1457–1463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Hollaender R, Hartl F, Krieg MA, Tyndall A, Geuckel C, Buitrago-Tellez C, Manghani M, Kraenzlin M, Theiler R, Hans D (2009) Prospective evaluation of risk of vertebral fractures using quantitative ultrasound measurements and bone mineral density in a population-based sample of postmenopausal women: results of the Basel Osteoporosis Study. Ann Rheum Dis 68:391–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Pinheiro MM, Castro CM, Szejnfeld VL (2006) Low femoral bone mineral density and quantitative ultrasound are risk factors for new osteoporotic fracture and total and cardiovascular mortality: a 5-year population-based study of Brazilian elderly women. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 61:196–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Gluer MG, Minne HW, Gluer CC, Lazarescu AD, Pfeifer M, Perschel FH, Fitzner R, Pollahne W, Schlotthauer T, Pospeschill M (2005) Prospective identification of postmenopausal osteoporotic women at high vertebral fracture risk by radiography, bone densitometry, quantitative ultrasound, and laboratory findings: results from the PIOS study. J Clin Densitom 8:386–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Bauer DC, Gluer CC, Cauley JA, Vogt TM, Ensrud KE, Genant HK, Black DM (1997) Broadband ultrasound attenuation predicts fractures strongly and independently of densitometry in older women. A prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Arch Intern Med 157:629–634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Miller PD, Siris ES, Barrett-Connor E, Faulkner KG, Wehren LE, Abbott TA, Chen YT, Berger ML, Santora AC, Sherwood LM (2002) Prediction of fracture risk in postmenopausal white women with peripheral bone densitometry: evidence from the National Osteoporosis Risk Assessment. J Bone Miner Res 17:2222–2230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Ekman A, Michaelsson K, Petren-Mallmin M, Ljunghall S, Mallmin H (2001) DXA of the hip and heel ultrasound but not densitometry of the fingers can discriminate female hip fracture patients from controls: a comparison between four different methods. Osteoporos Int 12:185–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 41.Gluer CC, Eastell R, Reid DM, Felsenberg D, Roux C, Barkmann R, Timm W, Blenk T, Armbrecht G, Stewart A, Clowes J, Thomasius FE, Kolta S (2004) Association of five quantitative ultrasound devices and bone densitometry with osteoporotic vertebral fractures in a population-based sample: the OPUS Study. J Bone Miner Res 19:782–793PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar