4.5 Article

TRABECULAR BONE SCORE IN PATIENTS WITH NORMOCALCEMIC HYPERPARATHYROIDISM

Journal

ENDOCRINE PRACTICE
Volume 22, Issue 6, Pages 703-707

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4158/EP151055.OR

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. SEIOMM-MEDIMAPS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The effects of normocalcemic hyperparathyroidism (NHPT) on bone remain unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in the trabecular bone score (TBS) of NHPT patients and asymptomatic hypercalcemic hyperparathyroidism (HHPT) patients. Methods: We performed a prospective study that enrolled consecutive patients with asymptomatic hyperparathyroidism (NHPT and HIIPT) with a follow-up >= 1 year at the University Hospital of Valladolid, Spain. Metabolic phosphocalcium plasma and mine parameters were evaluated in >= 2 determinations during follow-up to classify patients as NHPT patients or asymptomatic HHPT patients. A control group was enrolled during the same period. TBS and bone mineral density (BMD) were evaluated. Results: Thirty-nine patients with asymptomatic HPT (24 with NHPT and 15 with HIIPT) and 24 controls were recruited. NHPT patients and HHPT patients had a similar mean age, vitamin D level, TBS, and areal BMD (all sites). Compared to controls, symptomatic HPT patients had significantly higher parathyroid hormone (PTH) and calcium levels and significantly lower TBS and areal BMD at all sites (all P<.05). A significant negative relationship between TBS and PTH was found in asymptomatic HPT patients (r = 0.320, P = .043), which remained significant after adjustment for age, sex, and body mass index. Conclusion: There was no difference in the TBS between NHPT and HHPT patients. However, there was a reduction in the TBS of patients with asymptomatic HPT that was related to PTH levels but had no repercussion on bone mass. Higher levels of PTH seem to be responsible for this alteration in microarchitecture texture.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available