-
Journal of Endocrinological... Nov 2023Preventing fragility fractures by treating osteoporosis may reduce disability and mortality worldwide. Algorithms combining clinical risk factors with bone mineral...
PURPOSE
Preventing fragility fractures by treating osteoporosis may reduce disability and mortality worldwide. Algorithms combining clinical risk factors with bone mineral density have been developed to better estimate fracture risk and possible treatment thresholds. This systematic review supported panel members of the Italian Fragility Fracture Guidelines in recommending the use of best-performant tool. The clinical performance of the three most used fracture risk assessment tools (DeFRA, FRAX, and FRA-HS) was assessed in at-risk patients.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched till December 2020 for studies investigating risk assessment tools for predicting major osteoporotic or hip fractures in patients with osteoporosis or fragility fractures. Sensitivity (Sn), specificity (Sp), and areas under the curve (AUCs) were evaluated for all tools at different thresholds. Quality assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2; certainty of evidence (CoE) was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
Forty-three articles were considered (40, 1, and 2 for FRAX, FRA-HS, and DeFRA, respectively), with the CoE ranging from very low to high quality. A reduction of Sn and increase of Sp for major osteoporotic fractures were observed among women and the entire population with cut-off augmentation. No significant differences were found on comparing FRAX to DeFRA in women (AUC 59-88% vs. 74%) and diabetics (AUC 73% vs. 89%). FRAX demonstrated non-significantly better discriminatory power than FRA-HS among men.
CONCLUSION
The task force formulated appropriate recommendations on the use of any fracture risk assessment tools in patients with or at risk of fragility fractures, since no statistically significant differences emerged across different prediction tools.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Bone Density; Risk Factors; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 37031450
DOI: 10.1007/s40618-023-02082-8 -
Cureus Jan 2023The prevalence of osteoporosis in individuals with cirrhosis varies based on the diagnostic approach and etiology of the underlying liver disease. This systematic review... (Review)
Review
The prevalence of osteoporosis in individuals with cirrhosis varies based on the diagnostic approach and etiology of the underlying liver disease. This systematic review aims to evaluate the prevalence of osteoporosis in individuals with cirrhosis. Electronic databases were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of osteoporosis among patients with cirrhosis. The primary outcome was the presence of osteoporosis, as determined by a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan. Secondary outcomes were levels of biochemical markers of bone metabolism, including calcium, vitamin D, phosphorus, and parathormone (PTH) levels. A cohort of 836 patients from 10 studies was included in the final analysis. The pooled rate of osteoporosis was 14.80% (95% CI: 14.19-15.49). Pooled levels of biochemical markers of bone metabolism were as follows: calcium 9.09 mg/dL (95% CI: 8.73-9.45), 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH vitamin D) 15.41 ng/mL (95% CI: 14.79-16.03), phosphorus 15.41 mg/dL (95% CI: 2.99-3.51), and PTH 26.58 pg/mL (95% CI: 25.45-27.71). Pooled levels of liver biochemistries were: bilirubin 3.04 mg/dL (95% CI: 2.84-3.25), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) 65.35 U/L (95% CI: 61.39-69.31), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) 50.17 U/L (95% CI: 46.18-54.10), alkaline phosphatase 133.31 U/L (95% CI: 124.89-141.73), and albumin 3.25 g/dL (95% CI: 3.05-3.45). Cirrhosis appears to be associated with an increased risk for osteoporosis, with a pooled prevalence of 15%. This can include men and individuals younger than 50 years of age, a cohort not typically considered to be at an increased risk of osteoporosis. Levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) were also significantly low. Further studies are required to evaluate the risk of osteoporosis based on the etiology and stage of cirrhosis, especially in younger males, to incorporate this into future prediction models for fragility fractures.
PubMed: 36788896
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.33721 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Jun 2023Continuous use of glucocorticoids (GCs) has become the primary cause of secondary osteoporosis. Bisphosphonate drugs were given priority over denosumab and teriparatide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Continuous use of glucocorticoids (GCs) has become the primary cause of secondary osteoporosis. Bisphosphonate drugs were given priority over denosumab and teriparatide in the 2017 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines but have a series of shortcomings. This study aims to explore the efficacy and safety of teriparatide and denosumab compared with those of oral bisphosphonate drugs.
METHODS
We systematically searched studies included in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane library databases and included randomized controlled trials that compared denosumab or teriparatide with oral bisphosphonates. Risk estimates were pooled using both fixed and random effects models.
RESULTS
We included 10 studies involving 2923 patients who received GCs for meta-analysis, including two drug base analyses and four sensitivity analyses. Teriparatide and denosumab were superior to bisphosphonates in increasing the bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar vertebrae [teriparatide: mean difference [MD] 3.98%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.61-4.175%, P = 0.00001; denosumab: MD 2.07%, 95% CI 0.97-3.17%, P = 0.0002]. Teriparatide was superior to bisphosphonates in preventing vertebral fractures and increasing hip BMD [MD 2.39%, 95% CI 1.47-3.32, P < 0.00001]. There was no statistically significant difference between serious adverse events, adverse events, and nonvertebral fracture prevention drugs.
CONCLUSIONS
Teriparatide and denosumab exhibited similar or even superior characteristics to bisphosphonates in our study, and we believe that they have the potential to become first-line GC-induced osteoporosis treatments, especially for patients who have previously received other anti-osteoporotic drugs with poor efficacy.
Topics: Humans; Teriparatide; Glucocorticoids; Denosumab; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Osteoporosis; Diphosphonates; Bone Density; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37349750
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-03920-4 -
Medicine Dec 2017Bazedoxifene may be promising to treat osteoporosis of postmenopausal women. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Bazedoxifene may be promising to treat osteoporosis of postmenopausal women. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy and safety of bazedoxifene in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
METHODS
PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of bazedoxifene on osteoporosis of postmenopausal women were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcomes were vertebral fracture and spine BMD at 3 and 7 years.
RESULTS
Four RCTs are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with placebo intervention in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, bazedoxifene intervention can significantly reduce the risk of vertebral fracture [risk risks (RRs) = 0.69; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.52-0.93; P = .01], and increase spine BMD at 3 years (Std. mean difference = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.55-1.87; P < .005) and 7 years (Std. mean difference = 8.31; 95% CI = 8.07-8.55; P < .005). Bazedoxifene intervention results in no increase in adverse events (RR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.99-1.00; P = .34), serious adverse events (RR = 1.04; 95% CI = 0.97-1.12; P = .31), myocardial infarction (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.51-1.52; P = .64), stroke (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.64-1.46; P = .87), venous thromboembolic event (RR = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.92-2.64; P = .10), and breast carcinoma (RR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.59-1.79; P = .92).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo intervention for the osteoporosis of postmenopausal women, bazedoxifene intervention is found to significantly reduce the incidence of vertebral fracture and increase spine BMD at 3 and 7 years, and results in no increase in adverse events, serious adverse events, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolic event, and breast carcinoma.
Topics: Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Female; Humans; Indoles; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Fractures; Spine; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29245225
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008659 -
Neurospine Dec 2023We aimed to comprehensively compare surgical methods for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) using systematic review and network meta-analysis to...
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to comprehensively compare surgical methods for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) using systematic review and network meta-analysis to understand their effectiveness and outcomes, as current research provides limited overviews.
METHODS
We followed PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines, preregistering our protocol with PROSPERO. We analyzed Englishpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on adults with OVCFs that evaluated pain intensity or functionality using tools like visual analogue scale (VAS) or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Exclusions included non-RCTs, malignancy-related fractures, and certain interventions. Using the RoB 2 tool, we assessed bias and visualized results with Robvis. Our primary outcome was pain intensity, with secondary outcomes including disability, new fractures, and cement leakage. Results were synthesized using Stata/MP.
RESULTS
Thirty-four RCTs from 10 countries, totaling 4,384 patients, were analyzed. Shortterm VAS indicated kyphoplasty with facet joint injection (KIJ) as the top treatment at 87.7%, while unipedicular kyphoplasty (UKP) led to long-term at 74.9%. Short-term ODI favored vertebroplasty with facet joint injection (VIJ) at 98.4%, with kyphoplasty (KP) leading longterm at 66.0%. All surgical techniques were superior to conservative treatment. Vertebral augmentation devices reported the fewest new fractures and curved vertebroplasty had the least cement leakage. SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) analyses suggested UKP and VIJ as top choices for postoperative pain relief, with VIJ excelling in postoperative disability improvement.
CONCLUSION
Our analysis evaluates 12 OVCF interventions, underscoring KIJ for short-term pain relief and VIJ and UKP for long-term efficacy. Notably, VIJ stands out in disability outcomes, emphasizing the need for comprehensive OVCF management.
PubMed: 38171285
DOI: 10.14245/ns.2346996.498 -
Journal of the American Geriatrics... Mar 2017To evaluate the efficacy of treatment options to reduce osteoporotic fracture risk in men. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of treatment options to reduce osteoporotic fracture risk in men.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
Randomized clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy of a treatment for osteoporosis or low bone mineral density for adult men and reported fracture outcomes.
PARTICIPANTS
Men.
MEASUREMENTS
PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies. Information was extracted from included studies on participant sociodemographic characteristics, number of male participants, treatment evaluated, comparator for evaluated treatment, study duration, and fracture outcomes. Risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using measures recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration.
RESULTS
Twenty-four articles reporting results for 22 studies (including 4,868 male participants) met strict inclusion criteria. Fixed-effects meta-analyses using the Mantel-Haenszel method demonstrated significantly lower risk of vertebral fractures with alendronate (relative risk (RR) = 0.328, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.155-0.692) and risedronate (RR = 0.428, 95% CI = 0.245-0.746) but not with calcitonin (RR = 0.272, 95% CI = 0.046-1.608) or denosumab (RR = 0.256, 95% CI = 0.029-2.238) than in controls. For bisphosphonates as a treatment category, meta-analyses demonstrated significantly lower risk of vertebral fractures (RR = 0.368, 95% CI = 0.252-0.537) and nonvertebral fractures (RR = 0.604, 95% CI = 0.404-0.904) than in controls. The meta-analysis finding that bisphosphonates significantly reduce nonvertebral fracture risk was not robust to sensitivity analysis.
CONCLUSION
Bisphosphonates reduce the risk of vertebral and possibly nonvertebral fractures for men with osteoporosis. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of bisphosphonates for reducing nonvertebral fracture risk and the efficacy of nonbisphosphonates for reducing vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk in men with osteoporosis.
Topics: Alendronate; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Calcitonin; Denosumab; Humans; Male; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Risedronic Acid; Spinal Fractures
PubMed: 28304090
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.14668 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Translation Sep 2022All fracture repairs start with the innate immune system with the inflammatory response known as the inflammatory stage guided and driven by the secretion of chemokine... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
All fracture repairs start with the innate immune system with the inflammatory response known as the inflammatory stage guided and driven by the secretion of chemokine by the ruptured tissue, followed by the sequential recruitment of neutrophils, monocytes and macrophages. These innate immune cells would infiltrate the fracture site and secrete inflammatory cytokines to stimulate recruitment of more immune cells to arrive at the fracture site coordinating subsequent stages of the repair process. In which, subsidence of pro-inflammatory M1 macrophage and transformation to anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages promotes osteogenesis that marks the start of the anabolic endochondral stage.
METHODS
Literature search was performed on Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science databases (last accessed 15th April 2021) using "macrophage AND fracture". Review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline.
RESULTS
Eleven pre-clinical animal studies out of 429 articles were included in this systematic review according to our inclusion and exclusion criteria. All of which investigated interventions targeting to modulate the acute inflammatory response and macrophage polarization as evident by various markers in association with fracture healing outcomes.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review summarizes attempts to modulate the innate immune response with focuses on promoting macrophage polarization from M1 to M2 phenotype targeting the enhancement of fracture injury repair. Methods used to achieve the goal may include applications of damage-associated molecular pattern (DAMP), pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP) or mechanical stimulation that hold high translational potentials for clinical application in the near future.
PubMed: 35979176
DOI: 10.1016/j.jot.2022.05.004 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Jan 2021The fragility fracture discriminative ability of radius quantitative ultrasound (QUS) was evaluated in a systematic review of 13 studies, including 16,681 individuals... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The fragility fracture discriminative ability of radius quantitative ultrasound (QUS) was evaluated in a systematic review of 13 studies, including 16,681 individuals and 1296 fractures. The radial speed of sound (SOS) per standard deviation (SD) decrease contributed to an increased risk of total and hip fracture by 32% and 66% in women. Osteoporotic fracture, as a devastating consequence of osteoporosis, brings severe socio-economic burden. The availability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), as the gold standard of diagnosis, was quite limited in remote areas. Radius QUS measured by SOS shows potential in fracture discriminative ability where DXA equipment is not available. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the association between radius QUS and fracture risk. A detailed article search was carried out on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Libraries, CNKI, Wan-Fang database, VIP, and SinoMed for studies published between January 1980 and February 2020. We determined the estimated relative risk (RR) for fracture per each radial SOS SD decrease. A meta-analysis of studies was performed under the random-effects model. A total of 16,681 individuals were included in this review. Among the participants, 5892 were male and 10,789 were female. A total of 1296 cases of fragility fracture were included. With each SD decrease in radial SOS, the risk of overall fragility fracture and hip fracture was increased by 21% and 55%, respectively. Particularly, the risk was increased by 32% and 66% for women. The association was even stronger for postmenopausal women. Radius QUS showed great potential as an effective tool for fracture risk evaluation, especially for women.
Topics: Absorptiometry, Photon; Bone Density; Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Radius; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 32728897
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05559-x -
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and... Apr 2024Half of osteoporotic fractures occur in patients with normal/osteopenic bone density or at intermediate or low estimated risk. Muscle measures have been shown to... (Review)
Review
Half of osteoporotic fractures occur in patients with normal/osteopenic bone density or at intermediate or low estimated risk. Muscle measures have been shown to contribute to fracture risk independently of bone mineral density. The objectives were to review the measurements of muscle health (muscle mass/quantity/quality, strength and function) and their association with incident fragility fractures and to summarize their use in clinical practice. This scoping review follows the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for reporting. Our search strategy covered the three overreaching concepts of 'fragility fractures', 'muscle health assessment' and 'risk'. We retrieved 14 745 references from Medline Ovid SP, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar. We included original and prospective studies on community-dwelling adults aged over 50 years that analysed an association between at least one muscle parameter and incident fragility fractures. We systematically extracted 17 items from each study, including methodology, general characteristics and results. Data were summarized in tables and graphically presented in adjusted forest plots. Sixty-seven articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In total, we studied 60 muscle parameters or indexes and 322 fracture risk ratios over 2.8 million person-years (MPY). The median (interquartile range) sample size was 1642 (921-5756), age 69.2 (63.5-73.6) years, follow-up 10.0 (4.4-12.0) years and number of incident fragility fractures 166 (88-277). A lower muscle mass was positively/not/negatively associated with incident fragility fracture in 28 (2.0), 64 (2.5) and 10 (0.2 MPY) analyses. A lower muscle strength was positively/not/negatively associated with fractures in 53 (1.3), 57 (1.7 MPY) and 0 analyses. A lower muscle function was positively/not/negatively associated in 63 (1.9), 45 (1.0 MPY) and 0 analyses. An in-depth analysis shows how each single muscle parameter was associated with each fragility fractures subtype. This review summarizes markers of muscle health and their association with fragility fractures. Measures of muscle strength and function appeared to perform better for fracture risk prediction. Of these, hand grip strength and gait speed are likely to be the most practical measures for inclusion in clinical practice, as in the evaluation of sarcopenia or in further fracture risk assessment scores. Measures of muscle mass did not appear to predict fragility fractures and might benefit from further research, on D3-creatine dilution test, lean mass indexes and artificial intelligence methods.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Middle Aged; Hand Strength; Prospective Studies; Artificial Intelligence; Risk Factors; Osteoporotic Fractures; Muscle, Skeletal
PubMed: 38284511
DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13418 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Feb 2020This systematic review and meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of (major) osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures after screening using fracture risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review and meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of (major) osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures after screening using fracture risk assessment and bone densitometry compared with usual care. The results indicate that screening is effective for fracture risk reduction, especially hip fractures. To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of population screening for high fracture risk on fracture prevention compared with usual care. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies published until June 20th 2019. Randomized studies were selected that screened for high fracture risk using at least bone densitometry, screened in a general population, provided subsequent treatment with anti-osteoporosis medication, had a usual care group as comparator, and had at least one fracture-related outcome (all fractures, (major) osteoporotic fractures, or hip fractures). The primary assessment was the hazard ratio (HR) for fracture-related outcomes. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled HRs. We identified 1186 potentially eligible articles and included three randomized studies: the ROSE study, the SCOOP study, and the SOS with a total number of N = 42,009 participants. Respectively, 11%, 15%, and 18% of the participants in the intervention group started medication. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant and clinically relevant reduction of osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.89-1.00), major osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.91; 95%CI = 0.84-0.98), and hip fractures (HR = 0.80; 95%CI = 0.71-0.91), but no reduction of all fractures (HR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.89-1.02). The pooled HR for the secondary outcome all-cause mortality was 1.04 (95% CI = 0.95-1.14). Numbers needed to screen to prevent one fracture were 247 and 272 for osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures, respectively (corresponding to 113 and 124 performed bone densitometry examinations, and 25 and 28 persons being treated). This meta-analysis showed that population screening is effective to reduce osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures. Implementation of screening in older women should be considered as serious option to prevent osteoporotic fractures, especially hip fractures.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Hip Fractures; Humans; Mass Screening; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Proportional Hazards Models; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 31838551
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-019-05226-w