Discordance in diagnosis of osteoporosis using spine and hip bone densitometry

doi:10.1186/1472-6823-5-3

BMC Endocrine Disorders

Volume 5

Viewing options:

Abstract
Full text
PDF (232KB)

Associated material:

Related literature:

Articles citing this article
on Google Scholar
on PubMed Central
Other articles by authors
on Google Scholar

Moayyeri A
Soltani A
Tabari NK
Sadatsafavi M
Hossein-neghad A
Larijani B

on PubMed

Moayyeri A
Soltani A
Tabari NK
Sadatsafavi M
Hossein-neghad A
Larijani B
Related articles/pages
on Google

on Google Scholar

on PubMed

Tools:

Post to:

Research article

Discordance in diagnosis of osteoporosis using spine and hip bone densitometry

Alireza Moayyeri¹^,2 , Akbar Soltani¹^,2 , Nasibeh Khaleghnejad Tabari¹ , Mohsen Sadatsafavi² , Arash Hossein-neghad¹ and Bagher Larijani¹

¹Endocrinology & Metabolism Research Centre, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

²Research Development Center, Evidence Based Medicine Working Team, Shariati hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

author email corresponding author email

BMC Endocrine Disorders 2005, 5:3doi:10.1186/1472-6823-5-3


Published:	11 March 2005

Abstract

Background

Diagnostic discordance for osteoporosis is the observation that the T-score of an individual patient varies from one key measurement site to another, falling into two different diagnostic categories identified by the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system. This study was conducted to evaluate the presence and risk factors for this phenomenon in a large sample of Iranian population.

Methods

Demographic data, anthropometric measurements, and risk factors for osteoporosis were derived from a database on 4229 patients referred to a community-based outpatient osteoporosis testing center from 2000 to 2003. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was performed on L1–L4 lumbar spine and total hip for all cases. Minor discordance was defined as present when the difference between two sites was no more than one WHO diagnostic class. Major discordance was present when one site is osteoporotic and the other is normal. Subjects with incomplete data were excluded.

Results

In 4188 participants (3848 female, mean age 53.4 ± 11.8 years), major discordance, minor discordance, and concordance of T-scores were seen in 2.7%, 38.9% and 58.3%, respectively. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, older age, menopause, obesity, and belated menopause were recognized as risk factors and hormone replacement therapy as a protective factor against T-score discordance.

Conclusion

The high prevalence of T-score discordance may lead to problems in interpretation of the densitometry results for some patients. This phenomenon should be regarded as a real and prevalent finding and physicians should develop a particular strategy approaching to these patients.