DISCORDANCE IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF OSTEOPOROSIS DUE TO PEAK BONE MINERAL DENSITY FROM DIFFERENT REFERENCES: JAPANESE AND NORTHEASTERN THAI WOMEN

Authors

  • Charoonsak SOMBOONPORN Department of Radiology,Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University
  • Woraluk SOMBOONPORN Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University,
  • Sukree SOONTRAPA Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University,
  • Suppasin SOONTRAPA Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University

Abstract

According to the WHO guideline in the diagnosis of osteoporosis, use of inappropriate reference can result in the inappropriate bone mineral classification. This study aimed to explore the difference between the prevalence of abnormally low bone mass diagnosed by using the Japanese and the northeastern Thai reference. The subjects were retrospectively recruited from women, aged 20-90 years, residing in the northeast Thailand who underwent bone mineral density (BMD) measurement at the lumbar spines and proximal femur from May 1998 to August 2000 at Srinagarind Hospital. Concordant and discordant rate in the interpretation between both criteria were reported. There were 653 subjects with 779 studies included. Higher prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis was observed by using T-score of the northeastern Thai population, compared with that diagnosed by the Japanese reference at almost all sites except Ward’s triangle. Concordant diagnoses were found in 73.6% of all sites. Significant diagnostic agreement between both criteria was noted at all sites (Kappa = 0.18-0.80, p <0.001). Although resulting in some discordant classification, using the northeastern Thai reference classified the same BMD status in almost three-fourths of all sites. This study stressed the limitation of the WHO diagnostic guideline regarding the effect of different reference range used.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Hui SL, Slemenda CW, Johnston CC Jr. The contribution of bone loss to postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 1990; 1: 30-4.

Matkovic V. Calcium and peak bone mass. J Intern Med 1992; 231: 151-60.

Newton-John HF, Morgan DB. The loss of bone with age, osteoporosis, fractures. Clin Orthop 1970; 71: 229-52.

Pollitzer WS, Anderson JJ. Ethnic and genetic differences in bone mass: a review with a hereditary vs environmental perspective. Am J Clin Nutr 1989; 1244-59.

Johnston CC Jr, Miller JZ, Slemenda CW, et al. Calcium supplementation and increases in bone mineral density in children. N Engl J Med 1992; 327: 82-7.

Valimaki MJ, Karkkainen M, LambergAllardt C, et al. Exercise, smoking and calcium intake during adolescence and early adulthood as determinants of peak bone mass. Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study Group. BMJ 1994; 309: 230- 5.

Ls Welten DC, Kemper HC, Post GB, et al. Weight-bearing activity during youth is a more important factor for peak bone mass than calcium intake. J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9: 1089-96.

Kanis JA. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis: synopsis of a WHO report. WHO Study Group. Osteoporos Int 1994; 4: 368-81.

Theintz G, Buchs B, Rizzoli R, et al. Longitudinal monitoring of bone mass accumulation in healthy adolescents: evidence for a marked reduction after 16 years of age at the levels of lumbar spine and femoral neck in female subjects. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1992; 75: 1060-5.

Lu PW, Briody JN, Ogle GD, et al. Bone mineral density of total body, spine, and femoral neck in children and young adults: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9: 1451-8.

Teegarden D, Proulx WR, Martin BR, et al. Peak bone mass in young women. J Bone Miner Res 1995; 10: 711-5.

Rodin A, Murby B, Smith MA, et al. Premenopausal bone loss in the lumbar spine and neck of femur: a study of 225 Caucasian women. Bone 1990; 11: 1-5.

Arlot ME, Sornay-Rendu E, Garnero P, Vey-Marty B, Delmas PD. Apparent pre-and postmenopausal bone loss evaluated by DXA at different skeletal sites in women: the OFELY cohort. J Bone Miner Res 1997; 12: 683-90.

Ahmed AI, Blake GM, Rymer JM, Fogelman I. Screening for osteopenia and osteoporosis: do the accepted normal ranges lead to overdiagnosis? Osteoporosis Int 1997; 7: 432-8.

Melton LJ III. The prevalence of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 1997; 12: 1769-71.

Somboonporn W, Somboonporn C, Soontrapa S, Lumbiganon P. Bone mineral density of lumbar spines and proximal femur in the normal Northeastern Thai women. J Med Assoc Thai 2001; 84 (Suppl 2): S593-98.

Kanis JA, Gluer CC. An update on the diagnosis and assessment of osteoporosis with densitometry. Committee of Scientific Advisors, International Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporos Int 2000; 11: 192- 202.

Looker AC, Wahner HW, Dunn WL, et al. Updated data on proximal femur bone mineral levels of US adults. Osteoporos Int 1998; 8: 468-89.

Ryan PJ, Spector TP, Blake GM, Doyle DV, Fogelman I. A comparison of reference bone mineral density measurements derived from two sources: referred and population based. BrJ Radiol 1993; 66: 1138-41.

Lehmann R, Wapniarz M, Randerath O, etal. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the lumbar spine in German men and women: a cross-sectional study. Cacif Tissue Int 1995; 56: 350-4.

Smeets-Goevaers CG, Lesusink GL, Papapoulos SE, et al. The prevalence of low bone mineral density in Dutch perimenopausal women: the Eindhoven perimenopausal osteoporosis _ study. Osteoporos Int 1998; 8: 404-9.

Shipman AJ, Guy GW, Smith I, Ostlere S, Greer W, Smith R. Vertebral bone mineral density, content and area in 8789 normal women aged 33-73 years who have never had hormone replacement therapy. Osteoporos Int 1999; 9: 420-6.

Iki M, Kagamimori S, Kagawa _Y, Matsuzaki T, Yoneshima H, Marumo F. Bone mineral density of the spine, hip and distal forearm in representative samples of the Japanese female population: Japanese Population-Based Osteoporosis (JPOS) Study. Osteoporos Int 2001; 12: 529-37.

Kolta S, Ravaud P, Fechtenbaum J, Dougados M, Roux C. Accuracy and precision of 62 bone densitometers using a European Spine Phantom. Osteoporos Int 1999; 10: 14-9.

Genant HK, Grampp S, Gluer CC, et al. Universal standardization for dual x-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results. J Bone Miner Res 1994; 9: 1503-14.

Kalender WA, Felsenberg D, Genant HK, Fischer M, Dequeker J, Reeve J. The European Spine Phantom—a tool for standardization and quality control in spinal bone mineral measurements by DXA and QCT. Eur J Radiol 1995; 20: 83- 92.

Chen Z, Maricic M, Lund P, Tesser J, Gluck O. How the new Hologic hip normal reference values affect the densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 1998; 8: 423-7.

Pressman A, Forsyth B, Ettinger B, Tosteson AN. Initiation of osteoporosis treatment after bone mineral density testing. Osteoporos Int 2001; 12: 337-42.

Downloads

Published

2023-04-15

How to Cite

1.
SOMBOONPORN C, SOMBOONPORN W, SOONTRAPA S, SOONTRAPA S. DISCORDANCE IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF OSTEOPOROSIS DUE TO PEAK BONE MINERAL DENSITY FROM DIFFERENT REFERENCES: JAPANESE AND NORTHEASTERN THAI WOMEN. ASEAN J Radiol [Internet]. 2023 Apr. 15 [cited 2024 Nov. 21];8(2):143-50. Available from: https://asean-journal-radiology.org/index.php/ajr/article/view/603

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2002): May-August

Section

Original Article

License

Copyright (c) 2023 The ASEAN Journal of Radiology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Disclosure Forms and Copyright Agreements
All authors listed on the manuscript must complete both the electronic copyright agreement. (in the case of acceptance)

Most read articles by the same author(s)