Comparative assessment of fracture risk among osteoporosis and osteopenia patients: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundBoth osteoporosis and osteopenia remain worldwide public health concerns. They both lead to bone fractures, which can lead to disability and burden on those who are afflicted.ObjectivesTo assess and compare fracture risk between these two groups of patients.Patients and methodsOur cross-sectional study included 82 patients (46 with osteoporosis and 36 with osteopenia) with an average age of 63±9.33 years, who received treatment at the Clinic for Medical Rehabilitation, Clinical Center of Vojvodina in Novi Sad, Serbia. The assessment of the fracture risk was executed by applying the Fracture Assessment Risk (FRAX) index (an algorithm developed by the World Health Organization) based on clinical fracture risks or combination of clinical fracture risks and bone mineral density.ResultsPatients with osteoporosis had significantly higher risk of major fracture compared to patients with osteopenia (p<0.01). Results from FRAX index in osteoporotic patients showed that more than half (58.70%) of patients had a low risk of fracture; less than one-third of patients (30.43%) had an intermediate risk of major osteoporotic fracture, while almost four out of every 10 (39.96%) had a high risk of hip fracture. The majority of patients with osteopenia (63.89%) had a low risk of major osteoporotic fracture, while 36.11% of them had an intermediate risk. The majority of patients with osteopenia (91.67%) had a low risk of hip fracture. Statistically significant differences in relation to specific fracture risks between patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia, in particular, weight (t=−2.250, p=0.027*) and previous fractures (t=2.985, p=0.004**), were established.ConclusionOsteoporosis patients had a high risk of major osteoporotic fracture, while there was no association between the intermediate level for major osteoporotic fracture and osteo-penia. For patients suffering from an increased fracture risk, especially those who had already been diagnosed with osteoporosis, preventive measures such as designing individual therapeutic programs should be adopted.

Ellagic acid protects ovariectomy‐induced bone loss in mice by inhibiting osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption

“…Osteoporosis is becoming a severe health problem in the aging society around the world (Tomasevic‐Todorovic, Vazic, Issaka, & Hanna, 2018). The features of osteoporosis are decreased bone mass and destructed bone structure.…”

Gingival-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell from Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus): Isolation, Culture, and Characterization

“…5,6,8,9,11 GDMSCs have a potential proliferation rate characterized by Oct-4, Nanog, and SOX2 expression that play an important role in the self-renewal and survival of MSCs. 41,42 In addition to the proliferation potential of GDMSCs, their migration capability is also good. The GDMSCs can migrate into injury tissue and stimulate regeneration.…”

The Performance of a Calcaneal Quantitative Ultrasound Device, CM-200, in Stratifying Osteoporosis Risk among Malaysian Population Aged 40 Years and Above

“…Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to assess the performance of QUS in identifying subjects with suboptimal bone health (osteopenia + osteoporosis) and osteoporosis using DXA as the reference. The suboptimal bone health group is important because individuals with osteoporosis and osteopenia are both susceptible to fragility fractures [35,36]. In the first ROC, subjects with osteopenia or osteoporosis were grouped as suboptimal bone health.…”