4.5 Article

Bone quality assessment in type 2 diabetes mellitus

期刊

OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL
卷 25, 期 7, 页码 1969-1973

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-014-2704-7

关键词

Osteoporosis; Trabecular bone; Type 2 diabetes

资金

  1. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The increased risk for fractures in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) despite higher average bone density is unexplained. This study assessed trabecular bone quality in T2DM using the trabecular bone score (TBS). The salient findings are that TBS is decreased in T2DM and low TBS associates with worse glycemic control. Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for osteoporotic fractures despite high average bone mineral density (BMD). The aim of this study was to compare BMD with a noninvasive assessment of trabecular microarchitecture, TBS, in women with T2DM. In a cross-sectional study, trabecular microarchitecture was examined in 57 women with T2DM and 43 women without diabetes, ages 30 to 90 years. Lumbar spine BMD was measured by dual-emission x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and TBS was calculated by examining pixel variations within the DXA images utilizing TBS iNsight software. Mean TBS was lower in T2DM (1.228 +/- 0.140 vs. 1.298 +/- 0.132, p = 0.013), irrespective of age. Mean BMD was higher in T2DM (1.150 +/- 0.172 vs. 1.051 +/- 0.125, p = 0.001). Within the T2DM group, TBS was higher (1.254 +/- 0.148) in subjects with good glycemic control (A1c a parts per thousand currency signaEuro parts per thousand 7.5 %) compared to those (1.166 +/- 0.094; p = 0.01) with poor glycemic control (A1c > 7.5 %). In T2DM, TBS is lower and associated with poor glycemic control. Abnormal trabecular microarchitecture may help explain the paradox of increased fractures at a higher BMD in T2DM. Further studies are needed to better understand the relationship between glycemic control and trabecular bone quality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据