Skip to main content
Log in

Radiologische Diagnostik der Osteoporose

Radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis

Der Radiologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cite this article


Für die Diagnose der Osteoporose hat die Radiologie mit ihren vielfältigen bildgebenden Verfahren eine zentrale Bedeutung. Angefangen mit der „dual energy X-ray absorptiometry“ (DXA), die die einzige von der World Health Organization (WHO) anerkannte Referenzmethode ist, über die Projektionsradiographie zur Frakturklassifikation bis zu den neueren Methoden der trabekulären Strukturanalyse stellt die radiologische Begutachtung wichtige Weichen für das Management von Osteoporosepatienten. Im Folgenden werden ein Überblick über die gängigen Verfahren und ein Einblick in neue diagnostische Ansätze gegeben.


Having at their disposal a wide range of imaging techniques, radiologists play a crucial role in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with osteoporosis. The radiological tests range from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which is the only reference method accepted by the WHO, to conventional radiographs for fracture characterization, to more recent techniques for analyzing trabecular structure, and the findings are decisive in initiating correct management of osteoporosis patients. This review provides an overview of established radiological techniques and an outline of new diagnostic approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5


  1. Adams JE (2009) Quantitative computed tomography. Eur J Radiol Volume 71:415–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergot C, Laval-Jeantet AM, Hutchinson K et al (2001) A comparison of spinal quantitative computed tomography with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in European women with vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Calcif Tissue Int 68:74–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Delmas PD, Genant HK, Crans GG et al (2003) Severity of prevalent vertebral fractures and the risk of subsequent vertebral and nonvertebral fractures: results from the MORE trial. Bone 33:522–532

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Delmas PD, Langerijt L van de, Watts NB et al (2005) Underdiagnosis of vertebral fractures is a worldwide problem: the IMPACT study. J Bone Miner Res 20:557–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fechtenbaum J, Cropet C, Kolta S et al (2005) The severity of vertebral fractures and health-related quality of life in osteoporotic postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 16:2175–2179

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fink HA, Milavetz DL, Palermo L et al (2005) What proportion of incident radiographic vertebral deformities is clinically diagnosed and vice versa? J Bone Miner Res 20:1216–1222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Genant HK, Wu CY, Kuijk C van, Nevitt MC (1993) Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137–1148

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Grigoryan M, Guermazi A, Roemer FW et al (2003) Recognizing and reporting osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Eur Spine J 12:S104–S112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haugeberg G (2008) Imaging of metabolic bone diseases. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 22:1127–1139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnell O, Kanis JA (2006) An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 17:1726–1733

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kado DM, Duong T, Stone KL et al (2003) Incident vertebral fractures and mortality in older women: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 14:589–594

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kanis JA, Borgstrom F, De Laet C et al (2005) Assessment of fracture risk. Osteoporos Int 16:581–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanis JA, Burlet N, Cooper C et al (2008) European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 19:399–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman PB et al (2000) Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: a summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. J Bone Miner Res 15:721–739

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lachmann E, Whelan M (1936) The roentgen diagnosis of osteoporosis and its limitations. Radiology 26:165–177

    Google Scholar 

  16. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Osteoporosis Prevention, Diagnosis, and Therapy (2001) Osteoporosis prevention diagnosis and therapy. JAMA 285:785–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Prevrhal S (2006) Absorptiometry. Radiologe 46:847–860

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Riggs BL, Melton Iii LJ 3rd, Robb RA et al (2004) Population-based study of age and sex differences in bone volumetric density, size, geometry and structure at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res 19:1945–1954

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sambrook P, Cooper C (2006) Osteoporosis. Lancet 367:2010–2018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schuit SC, Klift M van der, Weel AE et al (2004) Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone 34:195–202

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to A.S. Issever.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Issever, A., Link, T. Radiologische Diagnostik der Osteoporose. Radiologe 50, 471–481 (2010).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: