Quantitative bone mineral assessment at the forearm: A review

Citation
P. Augat et al., Quantitative bone mineral assessment at the forearm: A review, OSTEOPOR IN, 8(4), 1998, pp. 299-310
Citations number
131
Categorie Soggetti
Endocrynology, Metabolism & Nutrition
Journal title
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL
ISSN journal
0937941X → ACNP
Volume
8
Issue
4
Year of publication
1998
Pages
299 - 310
Database
ISI
SICI code
0937-941X(1998)8:4<299:QBMAAT>2.0.ZU;2-N
Abstract
Bone mineral density and geometric properties of the human forearm can be m easured to determine the amount of bone or bone loss at the scanning site a nd to predict the risk of forearm fractures. These forearm measurements are also used to estimate bone mass at remote anatomical locations and thereby estimate the risk for spine, hip and other fractures. The peripheral locat ion of the human forearm, with its relatively small amount of surrounding s oft tissue, improves the accuracy and the precision of bone mass measuremen t and has made this site an early choice for the assessment of a subject's bone mineral status. Furthermore, the anatomy of the human radius enables t he examination of both cortical and cancellous bone. This review describes the procedures for non-invasive bone assessment at peripheral sites includi ng some of the more recently developed systems dedicated to assessment of t he distal radius. The accuracy, precision and normative values they provide are presented. Responses to different forms of therapies as well as the ab ility to discriminate or predict osteoporotic fractures are also assessed. Low radiation dose, comfortable and fast handling, moderate cost, and a str ong association with the risk of non-spine fractures, promote the use of fo rearm scanning as a widely applied screening procedure for the detection of generalised osteoporotic bone loss. However, a higher accuracy of fracture risk prediction at the spine or at the hip can be achieved by a direct bon e density measurement at these sites. The monitoring of treatment at the di stal forearm appears to require a longer follow-up time due to its decrease d responsiveness compared with such highly trabecular load-bearing sites as the spine and the proximal femur.