骨质疏松症诊断标准的探讨

本文目的是再次讨论骨质疏松的诊断标准问题。骨质疏松症的诊断以骨密度DXA检测为金标准。1994年世界卫生组织(WHO)推荐的骨质疏松诊断标准为:患者骨密度低于同性别人群峰值骨量均值2.5个标准差以上,或减少30%以上。这个标准的T值是根据年轻白人妇女计算的,但是对于不同地区是不能固守这一标准的。有研究调查我国部分地区骨质疏松症总患病率为32.3%(2.0SD)和14.9%(2.5SD),2种骨密度诊断标准计算骨质疏松症患病率差异有显著性,若以2.5SD为标准很可能造成漏诊。该研究者还发现骨质疏松症的患病率在老年远高于年轻人。而WHO采用的是白人年轻女性的数据库,它是否适用就更值得推敲。另有研究者以骨密度低于-2.0SD标准,推算杭州市妇女骨质疏松的发病率为29.5%。认为以-2.0SD为标准可以相对早期发现骨质疏松。还有研究对于高原的藏族人群进行检测,也得出同样结论。有研究者推算我国各个DXA仪器之间的换算公式,发现上述换算公式基本上与日本推出的相同,但是与美国推出的换算公式有差异。这都证明WHO骨密度诊断标准是否适用于黄种人是有疑问的。国内有研究者以BMD-2.0SD为诊断标准,结合以骨代谢生化指标,认为能全面合理评价骨转换。还有研究者对目前国内使用骨密度检测方法进行统计分析,发现60岁骨量丢失率有18%左右,70岁阶段达到22%左右。这个患病百分率比较符合中国人的实际情况。按照世界上基本通用的换算方法,1.0SD约等于10%～12%的骨量丢失百分率,因此建议男性骨质疏松诊断标准为骨量丢失率达到25%或2.0SD,实际诊断年龄在70岁以上。如果采用2.5SD,中国人患病诊断时间会推迟到70岁以后,尤其是男性要推迟到90岁以后。骨质疏松症的研究关键是正确合理的诊断,不同种族、不同国家或地区有不同的诊断标准。1994年以前全世界都执行WHO1985年提出的峰值骨量丢失2.0个标准差诊断为骨质疏松症。1994年WHO提出了白人妇女小于-2.5SD为骨质疏松,但也明确指出该标准仅适用于欧美白人妇女。以Orimo为首的日本骨代谢学会制定了日本人群的骨质疏松诊断标准:骨密度在同性别青年人平均值30%以下为骨质疏松,丢失20%～30%为骨量减少。1999年中国老年学学会骨质疏松委员会诊断学组建议骨质疏松的诊断标准为骨量丢失百分率达到25%,或者说2.0SD。对于国外也有学者倾向于采用-2.0SD的标准来评价骨质疏松症。有研究发现不同国家间,和每国内部不同人群和人种的骨密度是明显不同的。非洲和拉丁美洲人种的骨密度高于白种人,而白种人的骨密度则高于黄种人。总结:1、国内外人群间骨密度的差异是公认的,我国人群骨密度是低于制定国际标准的白种人的,有倾向以T值低于-2.0SD为骨密度诊断标准。但是大规模的流行病学调查比较研究还很少,有必要进一步提供更确切的骨质疏松诊断更改的流行病学依据。2、以2.0SD为标准可以减少骨质疏松的漏诊,对于流行病学人群调查筛选病例,进行危险因素分析和对骨质疏松高危人群进行干预实验尤为有必要。3、如果加强国内和国际间多单位的联合研究,可以提高标准制定的科学性和权威性。     

中国人骨质疏松症诊断标准专家共识（第三稿• 2014版）

中国老年学学会骨质疏松委员会组织专家在2000年第二稿的基础上,复习了近年来国际国内在骨质疏松症诊断方面的研究进展,结合中国人群特点和中国骨质疏松症防治实际情况,制定本共识为各级医疗机构开展骨质疏松症诊疗工作提供参考。骨密度测量在骨质疏松症诊断中有重要作用,可以参照WHO-2.5 SD的标准,也可以根据中国人群的实际情况采用中国老年学学会骨质疏松委员会(OCCGS)建议的-2.0SD或者骨量下降25%作为诊断标准。并提出了在使用DXA骨密度诊断时需要注意DXA的局限性,避免漏诊。根据近年来定量CT研究的成果,首次在共识中建议采用国际临床骨密度学会(ISCD)和美国放射学院(ACR)推荐的腰椎QCT骨密度低于80 mg/cm3作为骨质疏松的诊断标准。首次建议在骨质疏松诊断中的FRAX应用。脆性骨折作为骨质疏松症诊断标准的重要性,并推荐综合影像检查诊断脆性骨折和鉴别诊断。强调了骨生化检查的作用。     

贵州地区驻军部队退休干部骨密度及骨质疏松发病率调查分析

目的 观察贵州地区驻军部队退休干部骨密度(BMD)的变化规律及骨质疏松症的发病率,为部队老干部保健过程中骨质疏松症的防治提供参考依据.方法 随机抽取贵州地区2009~2011年来我院体检的退休干部455例,采用双能X线骨密度仪行BMD测定,以同部位、同性别峰值BMD减低2SD作为诊断骨质疏松标准,按性别、年龄分组进行统计学分析.结果 贵州地区部队退休干部各部位骨密度随年龄增高而逐渐下降,且女性的骨量丢失速率明显高于男性.骨质疏松发病率女性高于男性,Ward's区骨质疏松发生率显高于其他部位.结论 本研究分析了贵州地区部队退休干部骨密度及骨质疏松发病率的变化规律,为贵州地区部队退休干部保健过程中骨质疏松症的防治提供了参考依据.     

268例女性骨质疏松症不同部位骨密度研究

目的探讨骨质疏松症不同部位的诊断率,充实我国骨质疏松症诊断的数据,完善骨质疏松症的诊断标准。方法随机抽取我院门诊就诊的原发性骨质疏松症女性患者268例,测量腰椎、髋部的骨密度值,统计各部位的T值(T-Score),对T值进行统计分析。本研究结果列入范围为腰部(Total)正位(L1-L4)总体、髋部(Total)总体、股骨颈(Neck)、大转子(Troch)、转子间(Inter)、Wards。以上任一部位骨密度T值达≤-2.5SD就入围。结果T值≤-2.5SD的腰部(Total)共有238例;髋部(Total)共有63例;Neck共有176例;Troch共有39例;Inter共有40例;Wards共有209例。结论不同年龄阶段的女性,其不同部位骨质疏松检出率是不同的,在诊断骨质疏松时要参考患者的其他情况,依据不同部位的检测结果,作出综合评价。     

中国大陆地区以-2.5SD为诊断的骨质疏松症发病率 文献回顾性研究

目的通过对国内发表骨密度流行病调查相关文献进行分析和评价,进一步了解中国大陆地区以-2.5SD为诊断标准的骨质疏松症发病的情况。方法以中国医院数字图书馆(CHKD)以及万方数据为工具,以"骨质疏松"和"发病率"为主题词,检索带有各年龄段的男女样本量、测量部位、骨密度值、DEXA设备型号、骨质疏松症发病率等文献。骨质疏松诊断方法为双能X线吸收测量法,诊断标准为T值低于-2.5SD。应用统计学软件对我国骨质疏松发病情况进行分析。结果共检索109篇全文文献,其中16篇文献符合要求,其中6篇文献为同一型号仪器测量骨密度。40岁-50岁年龄段,女性骨质疏松发病率为6.37%±2.39%,男性为4.11%±1.70%,50岁-60岁年龄段,女性21.75%±5.96%,男性为12.90%±6.35%;60岁-70岁年龄段:女性为46.38%±12.03%。男性为19.90%±8.31%。70岁-80岁年龄段:女性为64.32%±9.79%。男性为28.97%±7.63%。80岁-90岁年龄段:女性为76.74%±5.28%。男性39.78%±15.09%。结论中国大陆地区男性在各年龄段发病率均低于同年龄段女性发病率,比值接近于1∶2。40岁以上人群骨质疏松症发病率为19.74%(约20%),约1.12亿患病人群。     

骨量丢失率在骨质疏松症诊断中的价值

在原发性骨质疏松症的诊断中，骨密度测量占有重要地位，WHO提出的骨密度与同性别健康人的峰值骨密度相比，低于2，5个标准差就可诊断为骨质疏松症的诊断标准已被广泛应用。刘忠厚则结合国人的特点推荐2．0个标准差作为诊断标准。由于不同种族、不同地域、不同方法(仪器、测量部位)骨密度测量结果有很大差异，各实验室都需建立自己的正常值。在     

中国大陆地区以-2. 0SD为诊断标准的骨质疏松症发病率回顾性研究

目的通过对万方数据与清华CHKD数据库检索,国内已发表骨质疏松症发病率文献进行分析,了解中国大陆地区以-2SD为诊断标准的骨质疏松症发病率。方法在两个数据库检索文献,以"骨质疏松"和"发病率"为主题词,带有各年龄段的男女样本量、测量部位、骨密度值、骨密度检测设备及型号、骨质疏松症发病率等文献。摘录骨质疏松症诊断标准为T值小于-2SD的文献。应用SPSS统计软件对我国骨质疏松发病情况进行分析。结果共检索112篇全文文献,其中14篇文献符合要求,有9篇文献为测量腰椎和股骨颈骨密度。男性样本量为10011例,女性为12943例;40岁-49岁年龄段,女性骨质疏松发病率为7.75%±6.38%,男性为4.0%±2.90%,50岁-59岁年龄段,女性28.0%±15.72%,男性为15.73%±9.49%;60岁-69岁年龄段:女性为52.67%±10.76%。男性为30.55%±10.79%。70岁-79岁年龄段:女性为79.45%±9.53%。男性为43.46%±7.30%。80岁以上年龄段:女性为89.55%±1.04%。男性66.19%±17.56%。结论中国大陆地区男性在各年龄段发病率均低于同年龄段女性发病率,并随年龄患病率逐渐增多,男性与女性的每10年骨质疏松症增长率分别约为15%和20%;40岁以上人群骨质疏松症发病率为24.62%(约25%),约1.4亿患病人群。     

应用QCT探索骨质疏松症诊断及分级诊断标准

目的　应用QCT检测健康成年人腰椎骨密度 ,探索骨质疏松症的诊断及分级诊断标准。方法　采用日本东芝制造 60 0HQ的CT(单能 ) ,对 12个年龄段 (5年为 1段 ) 5 14名 (男 2 0 6人 ,女3 0 8人 )健康志愿者 (除外患有影响骨代谢疾病及严重腰椎疾病者 ) ,进行L3松质骨BMD检测。结果①峰值骨密度位于 3 0岁年龄段 ,男性 (2 2 7 8± 2 7 0 )mg/cm3;女性 (2 40 9± 2 9 0 )mg/cm3。②峰值骨量过后BMD随增龄而逐渐降低 (P <0 0 1) ,至 45岁年龄段时 ,男女均进入骨量减少期 :女性 5 0岁、男性5 5岁年龄段时BMD均值进入骨质疏松期。③骨质疏松诊断标准有二 ,第一 ,BMD测定值比同性别峰值BMD均值降低 2 5SD以上。第二 ,BMD测定值比同性别峰值BMD减少 3 0 %以上可做骨质疏松诊断标准。④首次提出骨质疏松分 4级 (Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ级 )诊断标准及诊断量化表。结论　①QCT诊断骨质疏松具有较高的敏感性、准确性及可重复性。②骨质疏松分级诊断标准 ,给临床诊断、疗效观察及科研提供具体客观指标。③诊断量化表能帮助临床医师直接、准确、快捷的做出骨质疏松症的分级诊断并易于推广应用     

绝经妇女腰椎及髋关节定量cT骨密度测量诊断骨质疏松的初步研究

目的比较绝经后妇女L2-L4椎体及髋关节两个部位的定量CT骨密度（BMD )测量诊断骨 质疏松的效能。方法175例绝经妇女,年龄48-96岁,平均年龄为69 ±9岁。同时QCT测量L2-L4椎体的平均体积骨密度及髋关节类DXA的面积骨密度,右股骨颈和全髋二个感兴趣区（ROI )。 采用国际临床骨密度学会（ISCD )QCT骨质疏松诊断标准（<80 mg/cm3 )和WHO髋关节DXA骨密 度诊断标准即股骨颈或全髋感兴趣区的T值（-2.5 SD )进行骨质疏松诊断。比较二者诊断骨质疏 松的效能。结果175绝经后妇女中,QCT骨密度测量腰椎部位骨密度值骨质疏松的检出率是44%( 77/175 )。如果采用髋部检查股骨颈部位为11%.( 19/175 ),全髋部位为14%.( 24/175 ),或二者任一 部位为18%_( 31/175 )。如果只做腰椎,不做髋关节,有7人漏诊,而如果只做髋关节,不做腰椎会漏 诊44人。结论采用QCT骨密度测量,绝经妇女腰椎检查骨质疏松检出率为44%_,而髋部检查检出 率为18%_。采用QCT骨密度测量,测量腰椎一个部位就可以诊断骨质疏松。     

骨质疏松患者腰椎、髋部骨密度对比性研究

目的探讨骨质疏松患者在应用双能X线骨密度检测仪检测不同部位骨密度时应检测的部位。方法选取2013年1 月至2013年4月在我院行双能X线骨密度检测、符合骨质疏松诊断的患者共310例,比较腰椎、右髋、左髋骨密度低于M~2SD 的百分率差异和左右髋部的骨密度（BMD)值。结果腰椎骨密度检测结果低于M~2SD有223例,占71. 93%,左髋骨密度检 测结果低于M~2SD有190例,占61. 29%,右髋骨密度检测结果低于M~2SD有204例,占65. 08%,左髋、右髋骨密度（BMD)比 较F =0. 313,P =0. 576,两组无差异。结论双能X线吸收测定法是骨密度检查的“金标准”,技术员应检测腰椎、左髋及右 髋三个部位,检测报告三个部位的骨密度均值,并以三个部位中的最低T值作为诊断依据。尽可能避免骨质疏松的漏诊。     

老年骨质疏松症诊断标准探讨

本文对老年骨质疏松症骨密度（ＢＭＤ）诊断标准进行深入探讨。以美国Ｌｕｎａｒ公司ＤＰＸ－Ｌ型双能Ｘ线ＢＭＤ测定仪，随机对北京市６０～９４岁７３４名老年人进行ＢＭＤ测定，并分别以同性别、同部位峰值减低２．０及２．５ＳＤ作为骨质疏松症诊断标准进行分析比较。结果：以减低２．５ＳＤ较减低２．５ＳＤ所得骨质疏松症患病率高１倍左右，如以Ｗａｒｄ’ｓ三角为例，男性６０～６９、７０～７９及８０岁以上组，以减低２．０ＳＤ为诊断标准，其患病率各为２５．５％、４７．６％及４８．２％；若以减低２．５ＳＤ为诊断标准其患病率则下降为１０．６％、１９．０％及２３．２％，两者相差１倍以上。结论：若以减低２．５ＳＤ为诊断标准很可能造成一部分骨质疏松症患者被误诊、漏诊。鉴于国人ＢＭＤ峰值较白人低０．５ＳＤ左右，应以峰值减低２．０ＳＤ作为诊断骨质疏松症的标准为宜。     

1600例双能X线骨密度测定及诊断标准的探讨

目的　了解本地区正常人腰椎、髋部各部位骨密度（ Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ）随年龄变化的规律和骨质疏松症（ Ｏ Ｐ） Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ 诊断标准探讨。方法　采用双能 Ｘ 线骨密度仪测量１６００例正常人腰椎前后位、腰３侧位、股骨近段各部位 Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ 值,其中女性１０７２例,男５２８例,年龄范围３０～８９岁,按１０岁一个年龄组分为６组统计分析,同时分别以同性别、同部位峰值减低２０及其２５ Ｓ Ｄ 作为 Ｏ Ｐ诊断标准进行分析比较。结果　男女两性 Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ 值随年龄增长而下降,女性各部位 Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ下降趋势较男性明显,其中５０～５９岁和６０～６９岁两年龄组骨量呈快速丢失阶段。两性骨丢失速度７０岁之前 Ｗ ａｒｄ＇ｓ＞ Ｌ２ Ｌ４ ＞ Ｎｅｃｋ ＞ Ｔｒｏｃｈ,７０岁之后 Ｗ ａｒｄ＇ｓ Ｎｅｃｋ＞ Ｔｒｏｃｈ＞ Ｌ２ Ｌ４。在减低２０ Ｓ Ｄ 患病男性有２８８％ ,女性有３５１％ 的人已发生骨折。结论　为本地区不同性别、各年龄段 Ｂ Ｍ Ｄ 值及变化特点积累了数据和资料,同时提出为避免部分 Ｏ Ｐ患者误诊、漏诊,鉴于国情, Ｏ Ｐ诊断标准以减低２０ Ｓ Ｄ 更合适     

The use of multiple sites for the diagnosis of osteoporosis

Introduction It has been suggested that bone mineral density (BMD) measurements should be made at multiple sites, and that the lowest T–score should be taken for the purpose of diagnosing osteoporosis. Purpose The aim of this study was to examine the use of BMD measurements at the femoral neck and lumbar spine alone and in combination for fracture prediction. Methods We studied 19,071 individuals (68% women) from six prospective population-based cohorts in whom BMD was measured at both sites and fracture outcomes documented over 73,499 patient years. BMD values were converted to Z-scores, and the gradient of risk for any osteoporotic fracture and for hip fracture was examined by using a Poisson model in each cohort and each gender separately. Results of the different studies were merged using weighted β-coefficients. Results The gradients of risk for osteoporotic fracture and for hip fracture were similar in men and women. In men and women combined, the risk of any osteoporotic fracture increased by 1.51 [95% confidence interval (CI)=1.42–1.61] per standard deviation (SD) decrease in femoral-neck BMD. For measurements made at the lumbar spine, the gradient of risk was 1.47 (95% CI=1.38–1.56). Where the minimum of the two values was used, the gradient of risk was similar (1.55; 95% CI=1.45–1.64). Higher gradients of risk were observed for hip fracture outcomes: with BMD at the femoral neck, the gradient of risk was 2.45 (95% CI=2.10–2.87), with lumbar BMD was 1.57 (95% CI=1.36–1.82), and with the minimum value of either femoral neck and lumbar spine was 2.11 (95% CI=1.81–2.45). Thus, selecting the lowest value for BMD at either the femoral neck or lumbar spine did not increase the predictive ability of BMD tests. By contrast, the sensitivity increased so that more individuals were identified but at the expense of specificity. Thus, the same effect could be achieved by using a less stringent T–score for the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Conclusions Since taking the minimum value of the two measurements does not improve predictive ability, its clinical utility for the diagnosis of osteoporosis is low.     

The use of clinical risk factors enhances the performance of BMD in the prediction of hip and osteoporotic fractures in men and women

Summary BMD and clinical risk factors predict hip and other osteoporotic fractures. The combination of clinical risk factors and BMD provide higher specificity and sensitivity than either alone. Introduction and hypotheses To develop a risk assessment tool based on clinical risk factors (CRFs) with and without BMD. Methods Nine population-based studies were studied in which BMD and CRFs were documented at baseline. Poisson regression models were developed for hip fracture and other osteoporotic fractures, with and without hip BMD. Fracture risk was expressed as gradient of risk (GR, risk ratio/SD change in risk score). Results CRFs alone predicted hip fracture with a GR of 2.1/SD at the age of 50 years and decreased with age. The use of BMD alone provided a higher GR (3.7/SD), and was improved further with the combined use of CRFs and BMD (4.2/SD). For other osteoporotic fractures, the GRs were lower than for hip fracture. The GR with CRFs alone was 1.4/SD at the age of 50 years, similar to that provided by BMD (GR = 1.4/SD) and was not markedly increased by the combination (GR = 1.4/SD). The performance characteristics of clinical risk factors with and without BMD were validated in eleven independent population-based cohorts. Conclusions The models developed provide the basis for the integrated use of validated clinical risk factors in men and women to aid in fracture risk prediction.     

老年人髋部及腰椎测量点对骨质疏松症诊断的影响

目的：通过对髋部及腰椎测量数据分析，探讨不同测量点对骨质疏松症诊断的影响。方法：采用双能X线骨密度测仪对同一患者进行髋部及腰部骨密度测量，分析比较不同部位测量数据对骨质疏松症诊断的敏感性，结果：分析数据显示腰椎骨密度明显高于股骨颈骨密度值，而腰椎骨密度值诊断敏感性明显低于股骨颈骨密度值。结论：老年人股骨颈骨密度值具有更高的诊断敏感性。     

Effect of Total Hip Bone Area on Osteoporosis Diagnosis and Fractures

DXA is affected by skeletal size, with smaller bones giving lower areal BMD despite equal material density. Whether this size effect confounds the use of BMD as a diagnostic and fracture risk assessment tool is unclear. We identified 16,205 women of white ethnicity ≥50 yr of age undergoing baseline hip assessment with DXA (1998–2002) from a population‐based database that contains all clinical DXA test results for the Province of Manitoba, Canada. Total hip measurements were categorized according to quartile in total hip bone area (Q1 = smallest, Q4 = largest). Longitudinal health service records were assessed for the presence of nontraumatic osteoporotic fracture codes during a mean of 3.2 yr of follow‐up after BMD testing (757 osteoporotic fractures, 186 hip fractures). Total hip bone area strongly affected osteoporosis diagnosis with much higher rates in Q1 (14.4%) than Q4 (8.9%). However, incident fracture rates were constant across all area quartiles, and prevalent fractures were paradoxically fewer in smaller area quartiles (p < 0.001 for trend). Age was a potential confounder that correlated positively with area (r = 0.12, p < 0.0001). When age was not included in a Cox regression model, Q1 seemed to have a lower rate of incident osteoporotic fractures (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66–0.98, reference Q4) and hip fractures (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.43–0.94) for a given level of BMD. In age‐adjusted regression models, total hip BMD was strongly predictive of incident osteoporotic fractures (HR per SD = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.68–1.99) and hip fractures (HR per SD = 2.80, 95% CI = 2.33–3.35), but there was no independent effect of bone area (categorical or continuous). Nested matched subgroup analysis and ROC analysis confirmed that bone area had no appreciable effect on incident fractures. We conclude that total hip areal BMD categorizes a substantially higher fraction of women with smaller bone area as being osteoporotic despite younger age. Incident fracture rates correlate equally well with BMD across all bone area quartiles when adjusted for age.     

Prevalent vertebral deformities: Relationship to bone mineral density and spinal osteophytosis in elderly men and women

The aims of this study were to ascertain vertebral deformity prevalence in elderly men and women and to describe the association between bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and femoral neck, severity of spinal degenerative disease and vertebral deformity prevalence. We performed standardized spinal radiographs in a random sample of 300 elderly men and women participating in the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study, a population-based study of fracture risk factors. Radiographs were read independently by masked observers for the prevalence of vertebral deformity and severity of osteophytosis. BMD was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The prevalence of vertebral deformities was critically dependent on the criterion used. The less strict criteria seemed to overestimate deformities at either end of the spine region analysed. However, irrespective of the criterion used, prevalence of deformity was higher in men than in women (25% vs 20% for the 3 SD criterion, 17% vs 12% for the 4 SD criterion and 27% vs 25% for the 25% criterion). Femoral neck BMD was more strongly associated with vertebral deformities than spinal BMD for the 25% criterion (OR/SD change in BMD 1.39 (p=0.02) vs 1.20 (p=0.19)), 3 SD criterion (OR/SD change in BMD 1.45 (p=0.01) vs 1.10 (p=0.34)) and 4 SD criterion (OR/SD change in BMD 1.98 (p=0.0002) vs 1.68 (p=0.008)). BMD was also more strongly associated with biconcave deformities than either wedge or crush deformities and more so in men than in women. Severity of spinal osteophytosis was not associated with vertebral deformity. In conclusion, femoral neck BMD is at least equivalent to the lumbar spine BMD in strength of association with prevalent vertebral fractures. Spinal osteophytosis falsely elevates BMD without a concomitant decrease in fracture risk, indicating that any interpretation of spinal BMD needs to be adjusted for osteophytosis. These findings support the use of femoral neck bone densitometry in older men and women. Moreover, these data indicate that current criteria for radiological assessment of vertebral deformity are sufficiently loose to include a substantial proportion of non-fractures in the elderly, with important implications for the design of clinical trials. However, irrespective of the criterion used, vertebral deformities in men are at least as common, if not more so, than in women, suggesting that vertebral osteoporotic fractures are overlooked in men.     

密盖息对骨质疏松大鼠治疗作用的实验研究

目的观察密盖息单独和联合中药龟鹿补肾液治疗对骨质疏松大鼠骨密度及骨代谢的影响,探讨密盖息对骨质疏松的治疗作用以及与血钙、磷、维生素D代谢的关系,以及与生长因子的关系。方法用摘除大鼠双侧卵巢的方式制备骨质疏松模型,用密盖息治疗4周后,换用中药龟鹿补肾液治疗4周,应用HOLOGIC第4代双能X线4500W骨密度仪测大鼠全身、腰椎、股骨上段骨密度值(BMD),用ELISA法测定血清IGF-1水平和血清25OHVitD浓度以及血淋巴细胞维生素D受体(VDR)含量。结果密盖息治疗4周,治疗Ⅰ组(OVX+密盖息组)和治疗Ⅱ组(OVX+密盖息+中药组)较模型对照组(OVX组)腰椎、股骨上段骨密度增高,组间之比有显著性差异(P<0.01,或0.01相似文献   

绝经后妇女骨质疏松性椎体骨折与腰椎骨密度的关系

目的探讨绝经后妇女骨质疏松性椎体骨折与腰椎骨密度的关系。方法选择骨质疏松性椎体骨折的绝经后妇女23例为骨折组,无椎体骨折的25例绝经后骨质疏松妇女为对照组。两组的年龄、绝经年限、身高、体重、体重指数差异无显著性,均行胸腰椎正侧位X线摄片。用双能X线吸收仪（DXA）测量的腰椎（L2-4）前后位骨密度（BMD）、骨矿含量（BMC）和T值。结果骨折组BMD、BMC和T值均低于对照组（P〈0.01）。结论腰椎BMD降低与绝经后妇女的骨质疏松性椎体骨折相关。绝经后骨质疏松妇女应重视BMD变化,预防椎体骨折的发生。