-
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Mar 2024This review aims to evaluate the accuracy of various mandibular radiomorphometric indices in comparison with DEXA BMD measurements in the diagnosis of osteopenia and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This review aims to evaluate the accuracy of various mandibular radiomorphometric indices in comparison with DEXA BMD measurements in the diagnosis of osteopenia and osteoporosis based on a meta-analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the indices. PRISMA statement was followed. The materials for analysis were collected in August 2023 by searching three databases: PubMed Central, Web of Science, and Scopus. The selection of studies consisted of three selection stages, and 64 articles were finally obtained. Quality assessment was performed with the QUADAS-2 tool, and the general methodological quality of retrieved studies was low. Statistical analysis was performed based on 2 × 2 tables and estimated sensitivity and specificity were obtained using SROC curves. The most used indices were MCI, MCW and PMI. The best results in detecting reduced BMD obtained for MCW ≤ 3 mm, estimated sensitivity and specificity were 0.712 (95% CI, 0.477-0.870) and 0.804 (95% CI, 0.589-0.921), respectively. The most prone to the risk of bias is the MCI due to the examiner's subjectivism. Radiomorphometric indices of the mandible can be useful as a screening tool to identify patients with low BMD, but should not be used as a diagnostic method. Further research needs to focus on analysing the ability of the indices to detect osteoporosis and also in combination the indices with clinical parameters.
Topics: Humans; Bone Density; Absorptiometry, Photon; Radiography, Panoramic; Osteoporosis; Mandible
PubMed: 37870561
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-023-06949-7 -
Translational Psychiatry May 2024Schizophrenia is associated with increased risk of medical comorbidity, possibly including osteoporosis, which is a public health concern due to its significant social... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Schizophrenia is associated with increased risk of medical comorbidity, possibly including osteoporosis, which is a public health concern due to its significant social and health consequences. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to determine whether schizophrenia is associated with bone fragility. The protocol for this review has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020171959). The research question and inclusion/exclusion criteria were developed and presented according to the PECO (Population, Exposure, Comparison, Outcome) framework. Schizophrenia was identified from medical records, DSM-IV/5 or the ICD. The outcomes for this review were bone fragility [i.e., bone mineral density (BMD), fracture, bone turnover markers, bone quality]. A search strategy was developed and implemented for the electronic databases. A narrative synthesis was undertaken for all included studies; the results from eligible studies reporting on BMD and fracture were pooled using a random effects model to complete a meta-analysis. The conduct of the review and reporting of results adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Our search yielded 3103 studies, of which 29 met the predetermined eligibility criteria. Thirty-seven reports from 29 studies constituted 17 studies investigating BMD, eight investigating fracture, three investigating bone quality and nine investigating bone turnover markers. The meta-analyses revealed that people with schizophrenia had lower BMD at the lumbar spine [standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.74, 95% CI -1.27, -0.20; Z = -2.71, p = 0.01] and at the femoral neck (SMD -0.78, 95% CI -1.03, -0.53; Z = -6.18, p ≤ 0.001). Also observed was a higher risk of fracture (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.27, 1.61; Z = 5.88, p ≤ 0.001). Following adjustment for publication bias, the association between schizophrenia and femoral neck BMD (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -0.97, -0.29) and fracture (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.28, 1.35) remained. Significantly increased risk of bone fragility was observed in people with schizophrenia. This association was independent of sex, participant number, methodological quality and year of publication.
Topics: Humans; Schizophrenia; Bone Density; Osteoporosis; Fractures, Bone
PubMed: 38816361
DOI: 10.1038/s41398-024-02884-1 -
The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging Apr 2024Stroke survivors frequently encounter physical complications. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of stroke on bone mineral density (BMD) and assess the risk of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Stroke survivors frequently encounter physical complications. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of stroke on bone mineral density (BMD) and assess the risk of post-stroke osteoporosis or osteoporotic fractures.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify longitudinal studies reporting the influence of stroke on BMD, osteoporosis, and osteoporotic fractures. Pooled analyses were performed utilizing random-effects models.
RESULTS
This study included 21 studies with 1,029,742 participants. The mean difference of BMD in the paretic femoral neck between follow-up and initial measurements was -0.07 g/cm (95% CI, -0.09 to -0.04), and -0.03 g/cm (95% CI, -0.05 to -0.01) in the non-paretic femoral neck. A follow-up length exceeding six months was associated with a more pronounced decrease compared to a follow-up of under six months (MD, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.05 vs MD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.02; P = 0.03). No significant change in lumbar spine BMD was detected post-stroke (MD, -0.00; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.02), nor was significant change observed in the non-paretic distal radius, proximal humerus, tibia, trochanter, and total hip. Stroke was not associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis or osteoporotic fractures (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.95-2.13).
CONCLUSION
Stroke survivors undergo significant BMD loss in paralyzed limbs, most notably in the femoral neck. However, BMD in the lumbar spine does not exhibit a significant decrease post-stroke. The risk of post-stroke osteoporosis or osteoporotic fractures should be interpreted with caution and needs further investigation.
Topics: Humans; Bone Density; Stroke; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Femur Neck; Female; Male; Aged
PubMed: 38350301
DOI: 10.1016/j.jnha.2024.100189 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2024We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the quality and extent of evidence on associations between personality disorders (PDs) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs)...
INTRODUCTION
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the quality and extent of evidence on associations between personality disorders (PDs) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in population-based studies, since these disorders are leading causes of disease burden worldwide.
METHODS
A search strategy of published, peer-reviewed and gray literature was developed in consultation with a liaison librarian and implemented for Embase, CINAHL Complete, Medline Complete, and PsycINFO via the EBSCOhost platform from 1990 to the present and CORDIS and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, respectively. The inclusion criteria were as follows: I) general population participants aged ≥15 years; II) self-report, probable PD based on positive screen, or threshold PD according to the DSM-IV/5 (groupings: any, Clusters A/B/C, specific PD) or ICD-10/11; III) MSDs identified by self-report or ICD criteria (arthritis, back/neck conditions, fibromyalgia, osteopenia/osteoporosis) and III) cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional study designs. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted the data. Critical appraisal was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for systematic reviews of etiology and risk. A descriptive synthesis presents the characteristics of included studies, critical appraisal results, and descriptions of the main findings. This review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
RESULTS
There were 11 peer-reviewed, published articles included in this review (n = 9 cross-sectional and n = 2 case-control studies); participants were ≥18 years in these studies. No published gray literature was identified. Semi-structured interviews were the most common method to ascertain PDs; all studies utilized self-reported measures to identify MSDs. Overall, we detected limited and conflicting evidence for associations between PDs and MSDs.
DISCUSSION
The main result may be explained by lack of population-based longitudinal evidence, heterogenous groupings of PD, and few comparable cross-sectional and case-control studies. Strengths of the review include a comprehensive search strategy and a discussion of mechanisms underlying possible associations between PDs and MSDs.
CONCLUSIONS
The quality of most studies included in this review that examined associations between PD and MSDs in general population adults was high. However, the results demonstrated limited and conflicting evidence for these associations, in part, due to lack of comparable evidence, which should be addressed in future research.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021243094.
PubMed: 38835544
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1288874 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Evidence on the association between the risk of new-onset osteoporosis and oral anticoagulants remains controversial. We aimed to compare the risk of osteoporosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Evidence on the association between the risk of new-onset osteoporosis and oral anticoagulants remains controversial. We aimed to compare the risk of osteoporosis associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with that associated with warfarin use.
METHODS
Studies published up to 15 March 2023 that investigated the association between the use of DOACs and warfarin and the incidence of osteoporosis were identified by online searches in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science conducted by two independent investigators. Random-effects or fixed-effect models were employed to synthesize hazard ratios (HRs)/relative ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for estimating the risk of osteoporosis correlated with DOAC and warfarin prescriptions (PROSPERO No. CRD42023401199).
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis ultimately included four studies involving 74,338 patients. The results suggested that DOAC use was associated with a significantly lower incidence of new-onset osteoporosis than warfarin use (pooled HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.88, < 0.001, : 85.1%). Subanalyses revealed that rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of osteoporosis than both warfarin and dabigatran. In addition, DOACs were associated with a lower risk of developing osteoporosis than warfarin in both male and female patients, in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and in patients who underwent therapy for > 365 days.
CONCLUSION
DOAC users experienced a lower incidence of osteoporosis than warfarin users. This study may give us insight into safe anticoagulation strategies for patients who are at high risk of developing osteoporosis.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023401199.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Warfarin; Stroke; Hemorrhage; Anticoagulants; Atrial Fibrillation; Osteoporosis
PubMed: 37842293
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1212570 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Oct 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Hepatitis B virus; Hepatitis B; Osteoporosis
PubMed: 37230817
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.05.035 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.914740.].
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.914740.].
PubMed: 37654559
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1269546 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Nov 2023To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Gushukang (GSK) capsules in the treatment of primary osteoporosis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Gushukang (GSK) capsules in the treatment of primary osteoporosis.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials related to the treatment of primary osteoporosis were collected through online retrieval of the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (Sino-Med), VIP, US National Library of Medicine (PubMed), Web of Science and Cochrane library. The literature was searched from January 1, 2000, to March 17, 2022. The risk bias and quality of the trials included in the meta-analysis were evaluated with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk assessment tool. The effect size was expressed as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
A total of 24 randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were incorporated into this systematic review. The 2363 patients were all primary osteoporosis patients, of whom 1197 were in the observation group and 1166 were in the control group. GSK capsule group was superior to conventional medication group in improving beta type I collagen carboxy-terminal peptide (β-CTX) (MD - 0.28, 95% CI [- 0.31, - 0.25]), while in improving prepeptide of type I procollagen (PINP), conventional medications group was superior to GSK capsule group (MD - 1.37, 95% CI [- 1.92, - 0.82]), and there were no significant differences between the two groups in overall efficacy (OE) (OR 1.62, 95% CI [0.89, 2.98]), increase of bone mineral density (BMD) (lumbar spine: MD - 0.02, 95% CI [- 0.08, 0.04]; femoral neck: MD - 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.07, 0.05]; hip: MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.02, 0.02]), enhancement of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (MD - 1.37, 95% CI [- 13.29, 10.55]), serum calcium (S-Ca) (MD 0.02, 95% CI [- 0.13, 0.17]), bone glutamyl protein (BGP) (MD 3.75, 95% CI [- 12.26, 19.76]), safety (OR 0.37, 95% CI [0.07, 2.02]) and pain relief (MD 0.32, 95% CI [- 0.59, 1.22]). GSK capsule combined with conventional medications group was superior to conventional medications group in improvement of OE (OR 3.19, 95% CI [2.20, 4.63]), BMD (lumbar spine (MD 0.06, 95% CI [0.02, 0.10]), femoral neck (MD 0.08, 95% CI [0.03, 0.13]), hip (MD 0.14, 95% CI [0.08, 0.21]) and other parts (MD 0.04, 95% CI [0.03, 0.05]), ALP (MD - 5.56, 95% CI [- 10.08, - 1.04]), β-CTX (MD - 0.15, 95% CI [- 0.18, - 0.12]) and pain relief (MD - 1.25, 95% CI [- 1.83, - 0.68]), but there was no difference in S-Ca (MD 0.02, 95% CI [- 0.13, 0.17]), BGP (MD 1.30, 95% CI [- 0.29, 2.89]), PINP (MD 1.30, 95% CI [- 0.29, 2.89]), serum phosphorus (S-P) (MD 0.01, 95% CI [- 0.09, 0.12]) and safety (OR 0.71, 95% CI [0.38, 1.35]).
CONCLUSION
GSK capsules can effectively treat primary osteoporosis, and when combined with conventional medications, the drug significantly increased bone mineral density, relieved pain and improved bone metabolism-related indicators in primary osteoporosis patients with better efficacy. However, due to the inclusion of Chinese literature and possible publication bias, the reliability of conclusions still requires more high-quality RCTs to enhance.
Topics: United States; Humans; Osteoporosis; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Pain
PubMed: 37940992
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04264-9 -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Mar 2024The RICO study indicated that most patients would like to receive information regarding their fracture risk but that only a small majority have actually received it....
UNLABELLED
The RICO study indicated that most patients would like to receive information regarding their fracture risk but that only a small majority have actually received it. Patients globally preferred a visual presentation of fracture risk and were interested in an online tool showing the risk.
PURPOSE
The aim of the Risk Communication in Osteoporosis (RICO) study was to assess patients' preferences regarding fracture risk communication.
METHODS
To assess patients' preferences for fracture risk communication, structured interviews with women with osteoporosis or who were at risk for fracture were conducted in 11 sites around the world, namely in Argentina, Belgium, Canada at Hamilton and with participants from the Osteoporosis Canada Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network (COPN), Japan, Mexico, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA in California and Washington state. The interviews used to collect data were designed on the basis of a systematic review and a qualitative pilot study involving 26 participants at risk of fracture.
RESULTS
A total of 332 women (mean age 67.5 ± 8.0 years, 48% with a history of fracture) were included in the study. Although the participants considered it important to receive information about their fracture risk (mean importance of 6.2 ± 1.4 on a 7-point Likert scale), only 56% (i.e. 185/332) had already received such information. Globally, participants preferred a visual presentation with a traffic-light type of coloured graph of their FRAX® fracture risk probability, compared to a verbal or written presentation. Almost all participants considered it important to discuss their fracture risk and the consequences of fractures with their healthcare professionals in addition to receiving information in a printed format or access to an online website showing their fracture risk.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a significant communication gap between healthcare professionals and patients when discussing osteoporosis fracture risk. The RICO study provides insight into preferred approaches to rectify this communication gap.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Aged; Patient Preference; Pilot Projects; Risk Assessment; Canada; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Communication; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37955683
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-023-06955-9 -
Health Technology Assessment... Apr 2024Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both...
BACKGROUND
Bisphosphonates are a class of medication commonly used to treat osteoporosis. Alendronate is recommended as the first-line treatment; however, long-term adherence (both treatment compliance and persistence) is poor. Alternative bisphosphonates are available, which can be given intravenously and have been shown to improve long-term adherence. However, the most clinically effective and cost-effective alternative bisphosphonate regimen remains unclear. What is the most cost-effective bisphosphonate in clinical trials may not be the most cost-effective or acceptable to patients in everyday clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES
1. Explore patient, clinician and stakeholder views, experiences and preferences of alendronate compared to alternative bisphosphonates. 2. Update and refine the 2016 systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of bisphosphonates, and estimate the value of further research into their benefits. 3. Undertake stakeholder/consensus engagement to identify important research questions and further rank research priorities.
METHODS
The study was conducted in two stages, stages 1A and 1B in parallel, followed by stage 2: • Stage 1A - we elicited patient and healthcare experiences to understand their preferences of bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. This was undertaken by performing a systematic review and framework synthesis of qualitative studies, followed by semistructured qualitative interviews with participants. • Stage 1B - we updated and expanded the existing Health Technology Assessment systematic review and clinical and cost-effectiveness model, incorporating a more comprehensive review of treatment efficacy, safety, side effects, compliance and long-term persistence. • Stage 2 - we identified and ranked further research questions that need to be answered about the effectiveness and acceptability of bisphosphonates.
RESULTS
Patients and healthcare professionals identified a number of challenges in adhering to bisphosphonate medication, balancing the potential for long-term risk reduction against the work involved in adhering to oral alendronate. Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable, with such regimens perceived to be more straightforward to engage in, although a portion of patients taking alendronate were satisfied with their current treatment. Intravenous zoledronate was found to be the most effective, with higher adherence rates compared to the other bisphosphonates, for reducing the risk of fragility fracture. However, oral bisphosphonates are more cost-effective than intravenous zoledronate due to the high cost of zoledronate administration in hospital. The importance of including patients and healthcare professionals when setting research priorities is recognised. Important areas for research were related to patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, how to optimise long-term care and the cost-effectiveness of delivering zoledronate in an alternative, non-hospital setting.
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous zoledronate treatment was generally more acceptable to patients and found to be the most effective bisphosphonate and with greater adherence; however, the cost-effectiveness relative to oral alendronate is limited by its higher zoledronate hospital administration costs.
FUTURE WORK
Further research is needed to support people to make decisions influencing treatment selection, effectiveness and optimal long-term care, together with the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intravenous zoledronate administered in a non-hospital (community) setting.
LIMITATIONS
Lack of clarity and limitations in the many studies included in the systematic review may have under-interpreted some of the findings relating to effects of bisphosphonates.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This trial is registered as ISRCTN10491361.
FUNDING
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127550) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Topics: Humans; Diphosphonates; Alendronate; Zoledronic Acid; Osteoporotic Fractures; Osteoporosis
PubMed: 38634483
DOI: 10.3310/WYPF0472