Unrecognized vertebral body fractures (VBFs) in chest radiographic reports in Taiwan: A hospital-based study

Comparison of the Characteristics of Back Pain in Women with Postmenopausal Osteoporosis with and without Vertebral Compression Fracture: A Retrospective Study at a Single Osteoporosis Center in Poland

Background

The incidence of unspecific back pain and osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures increases significantly with age. Considering the difficulties in the diagnosis of spontaneous osteoporotic vertebral fractures, this retrospective study aimed to compare the characteristics of back pain in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis with and without vertebral compression fractures.

Material/Methods

This study enrolled 334 women with postmenopausal osteoporosis; 150 had vertebral fractures, and 184 had no vertebral fractures. Densitometric vertebral fracture assessment and bone mineral density measurements in the central skeleton were performed for each patient. The participants completed a survey about features of their back pain.

Results

Patients with vertebral fractures had more severe back pain based on the numeric rating scale: 6.14 vs 4.33 (P<0.001, odds ratio [OR]=1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29–1.59). Among these individuals, back pain caused reduction in normal activity during the day (P<0.001, OR=4.68, 95% CI: 2.86–7.68), and pain occurred more often (P<0.001, OR=1.77, 95% CI: 1.47–2.13), lasted longer (P<0.001, OR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.65–2.46), predominantly occurred in the lumbar spine (P<0.001, OR=4.70, 95% CI: 1.96–11.29), and intensified during normal everyday activities (P<0.001). Based on these results, a new survey was created. It demonstrated a sensitivity of 70.67% and a specificity of 67.37% in predicting a current compression fracture.

Conclusions

Patients with vertebral compression fractures experience higher pain intensity and exhibit specific features of back pain. The new survey can be considered a supportive tool in assessing the possibility of vertebral compression fractures.

Elderly men have much lower vertebral fracture risk than elderly women even at advanced age: the MrOS and MsOS (Hong Kong) year 14 follow-up radiology results

MrOS MsOS (Hong Kong) studies year 14 follow-up shows for subjects without baseline osteoporotic vertebral deformity, women's incident vertebral fracture (VF) rate was twice that of men. For subjects with vertebral deformity of baseline ≥ 20% height loss, counting subject, women's incident VF rate was three times higher than that of men.

INTRODUCTION

For MrOS MsOS (Hong Kong) baseline (BL) studies, 2000 men and 2000 women ≥ 65 years were recruited during 2001 to 2003. This study presents the year 14 follow-up (FU).

MATERIALS

Whole spine MRI was performed in 271 males (mean, 82.8 ± 3.6 years) and 150 females (mean, 82.0 ± 4.29 years). Osteoporotic vertebral deformity (OVD) classification included no OVD (grade 0), and OVDs with < 20%, 20~25%, > 25%~1/3, > 1/3~40%, > 40%~2/3, and > 2/3 height loss (grade 1~6). With an existing VD, a further height loss of ≥ 15% was a VD progression. A new incident VD was a change from grade 0 to ≥ grade 2 or to grade 1 with ≥ 10% height loss. OVD progression and new incident OVD were considered incident VF.

RESULTS

The proportion of osteoporotic subjects only slightly increased during FU for men but doubled for women. Groupwise, OVD was not associated with back pain in men; but OVD with > 1/3 height loss was associated with back pain in women. For subjects without BL OVD, 7.9% of men and 14.6% of women had incident VF. For subjects with BL OVD of ≥ 20% height loss, men's and women's incident VF were 17.6% and 52.6%, respectively, counting subject and 1.68% and 7.89%, respectively, counting vertebra.

CONCLUSION

Elderly men with or without existing osteoporotic VD have much lower future VF risk than elderly women.

Underreporting characteristics of osteoporotic vertebral fracture in back pain clinic patients of a tertiary hospital in China

Aim

Osteoporotic vertebral compressive fractures (VCFs) ​are known to be commonly missed in X-rays indicated for pulmonary or heart diseases. In this study, we investigated the underreporting status of VCF in back pain clinic patients when the spine was the focus of interest.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective analysis of 105 female cases (mean: 72 years, range: 55–93 years) from a tertiary hospital in China (facility A, FA). The patients with back and/or leg pain were referred for a spine X-ray. The images were retrieved and transferred to a central reading facility (facility B, FB), where images were double-read by two readers experienced in evaluating osteoporotic vertebral compressive deformity (VCD)/VCF. A qualitative VCD with <20%, 20–25%, 25–40%, and >40% vertebral body height loss was recorded as minimal, mild, moderate, and severe grades, respectively. A ​VCD coexisted with endplate/cortex fracture (ECF) was VCF. FB readings were considered as the reference.

Results

There were 34 true negative cases where FA and FB had a consensus. In 7 cases with minimal VCD, 3 cases with ECF, and 7 cases with minimal or mild VCFs, the FA readings were false negative. No standalone singular moderate or severe VCD/VCF in a patient was missed in FA's reports. In 25 FA reading positive cases with multiple VCFs, one VCF was missed in 8 cases, more than one VCF was missed in 15 cases, and one additional ECF was missed in 2 cases. In 14 cases, FA and FB had VCF number agreement, with the term ‘vertebral fracture’ was used appropriately in FA reports. In 15 cases, FA and FB had agreement in VCF number; however, the appropriate term ‘vertebral fracture’ was not used in FA reports; instead the terms of ‘compressive change’ or ‘wedging change’ were used. In most VCFs, severity grading was not given in FA. In 13 VCFs where grading was reported, all were marked as ‘mild’, including seven mild VCFs, five moderate VCFs, and even one severe VCF.

Conclusion

Among the patients with VCD/VCF, the false negative rate among was 23.9% (17/71), but the missed cases were all minimal or mild grades. One or more VCFs were missed in 32.4% (23/71) of the cases with multiple VCFs. Appropriate severity grading was not reported for most cases.

The translational potential of this article

The underreporting rate of osteoporotic vertebral compressive fracture in back pain clinic patients in a typical tertiary hospital setting in China compared favorably with literature reports. However, there is a general lack of awareness of vertebral endplate/cortex fracture sign and vertebral fracture severity grading, while minimal and mild VCD with endplate/cortex fracture may have clinical significance. Moreover, after one VCF is spotted in a patient, it is highly advisable to carefully check the whole spine so that multiple VCFs will not be missed.

Secondary prevention and estimation of fracture risk

The key questions addressed in this chapter are: • How can individual risk of fracture be best estimated? • What is the best system to prevent a further fracture? • How to implement systems for preventing further fractures? Absolute fracture risk calculators (FRCs) provide a means to estimate an individual's future fracture risk. FRCs are widely available and provide clinicians and patients a platform to discuss the need for intervention to prevent fragility fractures. Despite availability of effective osteoporosis medicines for almost two decades, most patients presenting with new fragility fractures do not receive secondary preventive care. The Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) model has been shown in a number of countries to eliminate the care gap in a clinically and cost-effective manner. Leading international and national organisations have developed comprehensive resources and/or national strategy documents to provide guidance on implementation of FLS in local, regional and national health-care systems.

Secondary Fracture Prevention: Plucking The Low Hanging Fruit

It is well known that one fragility fracture begets another. Fracture Liaison Services have been shown to narrow the care gap that exists in the care of patients with fragility fractures. A secondary fracture prevention programme “OPTIMAL” (Osteoporosis Patient Targeted and Integrated Management for Active Living) has been in existence in the public restructured hospitals and polyclinics of Singapore since 2008 and this is beginning to show significant beneficial results in terms of identification and management of fragility fractures. However, significant obstacles in the path of appropriate management of the patient with a fragility fracture still exist. A concerted, multipronged and interdisciplinary approach is needed to overcome these barriers. Keywords: Care Gap, Fracture Liaison Service, Osteoporosis, Singapore

Best practices in secondary fracture prevention: fracture liaison services

Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) have been demonstrated in many countries to provide an effective means to deliver secondary preventive care for patients presenting with fragility fractures. This review provides an update on journal articles, reports, guidelines and government policies, with relevance to FLS, which have been published during the period 2009-2012. International evidence of the extent and persistence of the secondary fracture prevention care gap has expanded during this period. Major professional and patient societies throughout the world, including the International Osteoporosis Foundation and the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, have supported international initiatives to disseminate best practice. Health economic analysis of FLS has developed considerably, with a consistent theme from investigator-led and government analyses that FLS provide highly cost-effective care. Opportunities to close the care gap, in a systematic way, for unrecognised vertebral fracture sufferers are also considered.