Central European Journal of Medicine

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 185–189 | Cite as

Potential role of FRAX analysis in postmenopausal women with osteopenia

  • Aleksandar Dimić
  • Stojanovic Sonja
  • Nedovic Jovan
  • Stankovic Aleksandra
  • Stamenkovic Bojana
  • Milenkovic Sasa
  • Mitic Valentina
Research Article

Abstract

Early diagnosis of osteoporosis and estimation of subjects that are at high risk for fracture, is neccesary for osteoporosis treatment. Dual-energy X-ray absorptometry (DXA) is a modern method for bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. However, along BMD, clinical risk factors may significantly influence fracture development. Therefore, FRAX algorithm was designed for the assessment of a ten-year risk for serious osteoporotic fractures (SOF), as well as hip fractures. In the current study, we tried to evaluate the possible lumbal spine and hip BMD influence on ten year risk for SOF and hip fractures and potential role of FRAX in predicting the therapy in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. We performed the study on 385 postmenopausal women. According to the DXA measurements, at the lumbal (L) spine (L1–L4) and hip (femor neck), patients were then classified as normal, osteopenic, or osteoporotic. BMD evaluation included the L spine and the hip (subgroup 1), and only on the L spine (subgroup 2). By filling up the FRAX questionnaire, a ten-year risk for SOF fracture and hip fracture was calculated. BMD evaluation, in complete patient’s group and in subgroup 1, resulted in the highest number of osteoporosis (61.04%, 48.08%, retrospectively), while ospeopenia was a main finding in subgroup 2. In the subgroup 1, a high risk for SOF and hip fracture was detected in 16.45% and with high risk for hip fracture in 11.38% subjects. In subgroup 2, only high risk for hip fracture was observed in 3.16% subjects, indicating the active medicament treatment. Simultaneously, correlation of BMD results with FRAX values for SOF and hip fracture, showed significant negative correlation (p<0.001). Obtained results showed significant role of femur neck BMD evaluation in predicting the future factors, which may, together with FRAX analysis, improve the therapy approach in postmenopausal women with ospeopenia.

Keywords

Osteporosis Osteopenia Postmenopausal women FRAX analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Dimic A. Dijagnostika i lečenje osteoporoze, Balneoklimatologia 2004; 28: 39–42Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Dennison E and Cooper C. Epydemiology of osteoporotic fractures; Horm Res, 2000; 54: 58–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Sleath B, Chewning B, de Vellis BM, Weinberger M, de Vellis RF, Tudor G, Beard A. Communication about depression during rheumatoid arthritis patient visits. Arthritis Rheum. 2008; 59: 186–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Kang HY, Yang KH, Kim YN, Moon SH, Choi WJ, Kang DR, Park SE. Incidence and mortality of hip fracture among the elderly population in South Korea: a population-based study using the national health insurance claims data. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10: 230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Lespessailles E, Cotté FE, Roux C, Fardellone P, Mercier F, Gaudin AF. Prevalence and features of osteoporosis in the French general population: The Instant study. Joint Bone Spine 2009; 76: 394–400CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Kanis JA, Brazier JE, Stevenson M, Calvert NW, Lloyd Jones M. Treatment of established osteoporosis: a systematic review and cost-utility analysis. Health Technol Assess 2002; 6: 1–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Kanis JA. Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk. Lancet 2002; 359: 1929–1936CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    The National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) Clinician’s Guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis 2008. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Aleksandar Dimic, Dimitrije Jankovic, Irena Jankovic, Todorka Savic, Nevena Karanovic. The effects of one-year simvastatin therapy on women’s bone mineral density. Cent Eur J Med 2010; 5: 588–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Raluca Pais, Remus Campean, Siao-Pin Simon, Calin R. Bolosiu, Laura Muntean, Horatiu D. Bolosiu. Accuracy of Quantitative Ultrasound Parameters in the Diagnosis of Osteoporosis. Cent Eur J Med 2010; 5: 478–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Trémollieres FA, Pouillès JM, Drewniak N, Laparra J, Ribot CA, Dargent-Molina P: Fracture risk prediction using BMD and clinical risk factors in early postmenopausal women: Sensitivity of the WHO FRAX tool, Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 2010; 5: 1002–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Trémollieres F, Cochet T, Cohade C, Pouillès JM, Ribot C. Fracture risk in early postmenopausal women assessed using FRAX. Joint Bone Spine. 2010; 77: 345–348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Szczepaniak IM, Dytfeld J, Michalak M, Gowin E, Horst-Sikorska W, Efficacy of densitometry and fracture risk assessment tool FRAX in making therapeutic decisions in osteoporosis-a study on female patients of university of medical sciences endocrinology outpatient clinic; Ginekol Pol. 2009; 80: 424–431Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, Johansson H and McCloskey E. FRAX™ and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK. Osteoporos Int 2008; 19: 385–397CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Ronald CH., Keibzak GM. Variance in 10-years Fracture Risk Calculated With and Without T-score in Select Subgroups of Normal and Osteoporotic Patients; Clinical Densitometry 2009; 12: 158–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Fujiwara S., Nakamura T., Orimo H., Hosoi T, Gorai I., Oden A., Johansson H., J. A. Kanis. Development and application of a Japanese model of the WHO fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX™); Osteoporos Int 2008; 19: 429–435CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Crabtree N. J., Bebbington N. A, Chapman D. M., Wahid Y. S, Ayuk J, C. M. Boivin, Cooper M. S., Gittoes N. J. L. Impact of UK National Guidelines based on FRAX-comparison with current clinical practice; Clinical Endocrinology 2010; 4: 452–456Google Scholar

Copyright information

© © Versita Warsaw and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aleksandar Dimić
    • 1
  • Stojanovic Sonja
    • 1
  • Nedovic Jovan
    • 1
  • Stankovic Aleksandra
    • 1
  • Stamenkovic Bojana
    • 1
  • Milenkovic Sasa
    • 1
  • Mitic Valentina
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for PreventionTreatment and Rehabilitation of Rheumatic and Cardiovascular Diseases “Niska Banja”NisSerbia

Personalised recommendations