Cargando…

The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was the first imaging tool widely utilized by clinicians to assess fracture risk, especially in postmenopausal women. The development of DXA nearly coincided with the availability of effective osteoporosis medications. Although osteoporosis in adults is diagnos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Choksi, Palak, Jepsen, Karl J., Clines, Gregory A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5975657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29862042
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40842-018-0062-7
_version_ 1783327028108328960
author Choksi, Palak
Jepsen, Karl J.
Clines, Gregory A.
author_facet Choksi, Palak
Jepsen, Karl J.
Clines, Gregory A.
author_sort Choksi, Palak
collection PubMed
description Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was the first imaging tool widely utilized by clinicians to assess fracture risk, especially in postmenopausal women. The development of DXA nearly coincided with the availability of effective osteoporosis medications. Although osteoporosis in adults is diagnosed based on a T-score equal to or below − 2.5 SD, most individuals who sustain fragility fractures are above this arbitrary cutoff. This incongruity poses a challenge to clinicians to identify patients who may benefit from osteoporosis treatments. DXA scanners generate 2 dimensional images of complex 3 dimensional structures, and report bone density as the quotient of the bone mineral content divided by the bone area. An obvious pitfall of this method is that a larger bone will convey superior strength, but may in fact have the same bone density as a smaller bone. Other imaging modalities are available such as peripheral quantitative CT, but are largely research tools. Current osteoporosis medications increase bone density and reduce fracture risk but the mechanisms of these actions vary. Anti-resorptive medications (bisphosphonates and denosumab) primarily increase endocortical bone by bolstering mineralization of endosteal resorption pits and thereby increase cortical thickness and reduce cortical porosity. Anabolic medications (teriparatide and abaloparatide) increase the periosteal and endosteal perimeters without large changes in cortical thickness resulting in a larger more structurally sound bone. Because of the differences in the mechanisms of the various drugs, there are likely benefits of selecting a treatment based on a patient’s unique bone structure and pattern of bone loss. This review retreats to basic principles in order to advance clinical management of fragility fractures by examining how skeletal biomechanics, size, shape, and ultra-structural properties are the ultimate predictors of bone strength. Accurate measurement of these skeletal parameters through the development of better imaging scanners is critical to advancing fracture risk assessment and informing clinicians on the best treatment strategy. With this information, a “treat to target” approach could be employed to tailor current and future therapies to each patient’s unique skeletal characteristics.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5975657
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59756572018-06-01 The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools Choksi, Palak Jepsen, Karl J. Clines, Gregory A. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol Review Article Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was the first imaging tool widely utilized by clinicians to assess fracture risk, especially in postmenopausal women. The development of DXA nearly coincided with the availability of effective osteoporosis medications. Although osteoporosis in adults is diagnosed based on a T-score equal to or below − 2.5 SD, most individuals who sustain fragility fractures are above this arbitrary cutoff. This incongruity poses a challenge to clinicians to identify patients who may benefit from osteoporosis treatments. DXA scanners generate 2 dimensional images of complex 3 dimensional structures, and report bone density as the quotient of the bone mineral content divided by the bone area. An obvious pitfall of this method is that a larger bone will convey superior strength, but may in fact have the same bone density as a smaller bone. Other imaging modalities are available such as peripheral quantitative CT, but are largely research tools. Current osteoporosis medications increase bone density and reduce fracture risk but the mechanisms of these actions vary. Anti-resorptive medications (bisphosphonates and denosumab) primarily increase endocortical bone by bolstering mineralization of endosteal resorption pits and thereby increase cortical thickness and reduce cortical porosity. Anabolic medications (teriparatide and abaloparatide) increase the periosteal and endosteal perimeters without large changes in cortical thickness resulting in a larger more structurally sound bone. Because of the differences in the mechanisms of the various drugs, there are likely benefits of selecting a treatment based on a patient’s unique bone structure and pattern of bone loss. This review retreats to basic principles in order to advance clinical management of fragility fractures by examining how skeletal biomechanics, size, shape, and ultra-structural properties are the ultimate predictors of bone strength. Accurate measurement of these skeletal parameters through the development of better imaging scanners is critical to advancing fracture risk assessment and informing clinicians on the best treatment strategy. With this information, a “treat to target” approach could be employed to tailor current and future therapies to each patient’s unique skeletal characteristics. BioMed Central 2018-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5975657/ /pubmed/29862042 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40842-018-0062-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review Article
Choksi, Palak
Jepsen, Karl J.
Clines, Gregory A.
The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title_full The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title_fullStr The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title_full_unstemmed The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title_short The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
title_sort challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5975657/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29862042
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40842-018-0062-7
work_keys_str_mv AT choksipalak thechallengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools
AT jepsenkarlj thechallengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools
AT clinesgregorya thechallengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools
AT choksipalak challengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools
AT jepsenkarlj challengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools
AT clinesgregorya challengesofdiagnosingosteoporosisandthelimitationsofcurrentlyavailabletools