Vertebral fracture assessment in healthy men: Prevalence and risk factors

Bone 43 (2008) 544–548

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Bone j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s e v i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / b o n e

Vertebral fracture assessment in healthy men: Prevalence and risk factors A. El Maghraoui ⁎, A. Mounach, S. Gassim, M. Ghazi Rheumatology and Physical Rehabilitation Department, Military Hospital Mohammed V, PO Box: 1018, Rabat, Morocco

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 1 February 2008 Revised 27 April 2008 Accepted 12 May 2008 Available online 19 May 2008 Edited by: Harry Genant Keywords: Vertebral fracture Osteoporosis Vertebral fracture assessment DXA Prevalence Risk factors

a b s t r a c t Introduction: Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) is a technology that can reliably and accurately diagnose vertebral fractures with greater patient convenience, less radiation exposure, and lower cost than standard spine radiography. Objective: To study prevalence and risk factors of vertebral fractures using VFA in healthy men. Methods: The study cohort consists of a population of 216 healthy men aged between 50 and 79 (mean age, weight and BMI of 63.8 years, 73.3 kg and 25.7 kg/m2, respectively). Lateral VFA images and scans of the lumbar spine and proximal femur were obtained by two technologists using a GE Healthcare Lunar Prodigy densitometer. Vertebral fractures were defined using a combination of Genant semiquantitative (SQ) approach and morphometry. Results: Ninety-three percent of vertebrae from T4–L4 and 98% from T8–L4 were adequately visualized on VFA. Vertebral fractures were detected in 29.6% (64/216) of these men: 34/216 (15.7%) had grade 1 and 30/216 (13.8%) had grades 2 or 3. Twenty one of men with VFA-identified fracture (32.8%) had only a single vertebral fracture, while the other 67.2% had two or more. Fractures were most common in the mid-thoracic spine and at the thoracolumbar junction. As would be expected, the prevalence of VFA-detected fractures increased with age and as BMD declined. This group of men had a statistically significant lower weight, height, calcium consumption and T-score than those without a VFA-identified vertebral fracture. Regression analysis showed that presence of vertebral fracture was mainly related to the osteoporotic status (OR: 9.0; 95% CI: 3.5–22.8). Conclusion: VFA allows evaluation of the majority of vertebral bodies in men. Vertebral fractures are common in healthy men and are related to low BMD. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction Vertebral fracture is one of the most common consequences of osteoporosis, a major public health burden worldwide characterized by decreased bone mass and by increased susceptibility to fractures. Men account for 33–50% of all vertebral fractures, 20–35% of all femoral fractures and 15% of all distal forearm fractures [1]. Vertebral fractures are important to detect because they have been associated with reduced quality of life, increased morbidity and mortality, and increased risk of future vertebral and non-vertebral fractures [2,3]. The standard method to assess vertebral fracture is radiography of the thoraco-lumbar spine. However, there is no gold standard for the definition of osteoporotic vertebral fracture [4]. A number of methods have been developed for interpretation of spinal X-rays, including the Genant semi-quantitative method, which has been used as a surrogate gold standard in a number of key osteoporosis studies [5]. This approach is more objective and reproducible than other qualitative methods [6]. Vertebral morphometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) also known as VFA is a fast, low-radiation technique which produces images that are of sufficient quality to be used to diagnose the presence of vertebral deformity consistent with fracture ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (A. El Maghraoui). 8756-3282/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2008.05.008

[7]. VFA has demonstrated utility for vertebral visualization and thus is an important tool for fracture detection in women and men [8,9]. VFA offers “point of service” convenience for the patient when it is done at the same visit as for BMD measurement by DXA, with far less radiation than standard radiography [10]. The effective radiation dose for VFA is about 30–50 micro Sieverts (μSv) vs. 1800–2000 μSv for a lateral thoracic and lumber spine X-ray. By comparison, typical background radiation at sea level in the USA is about 7 μSv per day [11]. Clinical risk factors associated with vertebral fractures have been well studied in women [12–15]. In contrast, few studies of prevalence and risk factors for vertebral fractures in men exist especially in healthy and asymptomatic populations. We aimed in the present study to evaluate the prevalence, risk factors and clinical characteristics associated with vertebral fractures in a cohort of healthy men aged over 50 who had a VFA examination during their bone mineral density (BMD) testing. Materials and methods Subjects A total of 216 healthy Caucasian men (age range: 50−79 years) living in the Rabat area participated in the present study. Rabat is the capital of Morocco with a diverse population representing most

A. El Maghraoui et al. / Bone 43 (2008) 544–548

545

Table 1 Comparison between patients with and without vertebral fractures Patients with grades P Patients with Patients without vertebral fractures grade 1 vertebral 2 or 3 vertebral fractures fractures N = 152 N = 30 N = 34 Age: years 63.2 (8.1) Weight: kg 74.4 (11.9) Height: m 1.69 (0.06) BMI: m/kg2 25.9 (3.8) Current tobacco 63 (41.2) consumption Low calcium 106 (69.7) consumption High coffee 42 (27.5) consumption High soda 80 (52.3) consumption Low physical 117 (76.5) activity 1.120 (0.15) Lumbar spine BMD: g/cm2 Lumbar spine −0.5 (1.0) T-score Total hip BMD: 0.905 (0.14) g/cm2 Total hip T-score − 1.3 (0.7)

66.3 (9.3) 72.4 (11.5) 1.67 (0.05) 25.9 (4.1) 1 (3.0)

64.4 (7.7) 68.8 (14.2) 1.66 (0.06) 24.6 (4.0) 6 (20.0)

NS 0.028 NS NS NS

28 (82.4)

25 (83.3)

0.047

9 (26.5)

10 (33.3)

NS

12 (35.3)

16 (53.3)

NS

9 (26.5)

8 (26.7)

NS

1.033 (0.19)

1.031 (0.15)

0.026

−1.0 (1.3)

−1.1 (0.9)

0.028

0.845 (0.12)

0.706 (0.65)

0.001

−1.7 (0.9)

−1.7 (0.8)

0.005

Data as mean (SD) or number (percent).

Moroccans. Morocco has a population of 29,891,708 (2004 population Census), most of whom are Caucasians, and Rabat is a modern city of 627,932 inhabitants (49.8% male). The subjects were extracted from a database of healthy volunteers aged between 20 and 79 years which served to establish the normal reference curve of BMD in Moroccan men. The recruitment was made in part among hospital staff, university students and lay people contacted by word of mouth. Though the sample was not a true probability sample, care was taken to ensure representativeness of the general population, enrolling nearly ten subjects per year of age and with a particular regard to the inclusion of a wide range of body sizes and activities. The BMD of the lumbar spine and proximal right femur of these male volunteers with no previous history of bone disease was measured after they gave informed consent. The study was approved by the local Ethics Committee. All subjects were fully ambulatory. Screening was done by physical examination and questionnaires. Men using medications affecting calcium metabolism and those with medical conditions known to affect bone metabolism or with a history of any fracture or major systemic disorder were excluded. Thus, we excluded subjects with non-Caucasian origin, gastrectomy, intestinal resection, recent hyperthyroidism or hyperparathyroidism, treatment with corticosteroids for more than 6 months, or recent severe immobilization (last two years). We did not exclude individuals using inhalation steroids or with certain lifestyle habits, such as heavy smoking, being sedentary, being athletic, or having a high or low calcium intake, which are examples of voluntary factors that may have some impact on bone metabolism.

Fig. 1. Vertebral visualization using VFA.

Fig. 2. VFA-identified fracture distribution.

Each subject completed a standardized questionnaire designed to document putative risk factors of osteoporosis. The questionnaire collected information on life style, smoking habits, and level of physical activity in leisure time, along with calcium consumption and the use of vitamins and medications. Height and weight were measured in our centre before DXA measurement with light indoor clothes on, but without shoes. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated by dividing weight in kilograms by height in meters squared. Lifestyle (alcohol consumption, gymnastics or jogging/walking, smoking) and diet (milk, yogurt, cheese, coffee, soda) habits were also recorded. The men were asked whether they usually drank milk, coffee, soda or alcohol, if they ate cheese or yogurt, if they did gymnastics or jogging/ walking, and if they smoked tobacco. If the answer was positive, they were asked to quantify their average current consumption (evaluated on the 7 days prior to the interview) of milk or yogurt (mL/d), cheese (g/d), and wine and/or spirits (mL/d). Tobacco smoking was quantified as average number of cigarets (smoked/d) multiplied by the number of years of smoking, gymnastics (defined as a sport involving performance of exercises requiring physical strength, agility and coordination) as minutes per week, or jogging/walking as minutes per day. Finally, patients were categorized as never smokers, ex-smokers and current smokers; high, normal and low calcium intake (more than 1500 mg/d, between 800 and 1500/d and below 800 mg/d respectively); high, moderate and low coffee intake (more than 3 cups/d, between 1 and 3 cups/d and below 1 cup/d respectively); high, moderate and low soda intake (more than 500 mL/d, between 100 and 500 mL/d and less than 100 mL/d respectively); high, moderate and low physical activity (more than 3 h/week, 2–3 h/week and below 1 h/ week respectively).

Fig. 3. Vertebral fracture prevalence by age and by Genant grade.

546

A. El Maghraoui et al. / Bone 43 (2008) 544–548

In total, 678 men were screened. Among them 186 individuals were excluded from the study according to predetermined exclusion criteria, whereas 592 met all inclusion criteria and were invited to participate in the BMD measurement. Men aged over 50 had a VFA at the same time of BMD measurement. BMD measurement Bone mineral density was determined by a Lunar Prodigy Vision DXA system (Lunar Corp., Madison, WI). The DXA scans were obtained by standard procedures supplied by the manufacturer for scanning and analysis. All BMD measurements were carried out by 2 experienced technicians. Daily quality control was carried out by measurement of a Lunar phantom. At the time of the study, phantom measurements showed stable results. The phantom precision expressed as the coefficient of variation percentage was 0.08. Moreover, reproducibility has been assessed recently in clinical practice and showed a smallest detectable difference of 0.04 g/cm2 (spine) and 0.02 (hips) [16,17]. Patient BMD was measured at the lumbar spine (anteroposterior projection at L1–L4) and at the femurs (i.e., femoral neck, trochanter, and total hip). The World Health Organization (WHO) classification system was applied, defining osteoporosis as Tscore ≤ −2.5 and osteopenia as −2.5 b T-score b −1. Study participants were categorized by the lowest T-score of the L1–4 lumbar spine, femur neck, or total femur. The Moroccan male normative database was used for T-score calculation: the mean (SD) values for young normal adults in the Moroccan male normative database were 1.205 g/ cm2 (0.15) for lumbar spine, 1.147 g/cm2 (0.16) for femoral neck, and 1.161 g/cm2 (0.16) for total hip. VFA was classified using a combination of Genant semiquantitative (SQ) approach and morphometry in the following manner: each VFA image was inspected visually by two clinicians (MG and AM who had a previous training session in VFA) to decide whether it contained a fracture in any of the visualized vertebrae. Each vertebra that was judged as fractured by visual inspection by any of the investigators was measured using built-in morphometry and assigned a grade based on Genant SQ scale5, where grade 1 (mild) fracture is a reduction in vertebral height of 20–25%, grade 2 (moderate) a reduction of 26–40%, and grade 3 (severe) a reduction of over 40%. Subjects with no fractures were included in the non-fracture group, whereas those with grade 1 or higher fractures were included in the fracture group. However, as many studies rarely report mild deformities as “fractures”, and to realize comparisons with the literature, we performed a double analysis including and excluding grade 1 fractures from the fracture group.

Statistical analysis Results are presented as means (SD) and categorical variables are expressed as frequencies. To compare patients with and without vertebral fractures, chi-square test and analysis of variance ANOVA were used firstly. Potential risk factors were entered to a stepwise conditional binary regression analysis and the resulted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were reported. The level for significance was taken as p ≤ 0.05. Excel 2007 and SPSS 15.0 were used for statistical analysis. Results Patient demographics In this cohort of 216 men, the mean ± SD (range) age, weight and BMI were 63.8 ± 8.2 (50 to 79) years, 73.3 ± 12.3 (40 to 106) and 25.7 ± 3.9 (17.0 to 37.5) kg/m2, respectively. All patients were Caucasian. Vertebral fractures were identified using VFA in 64 (29.6%); this group of men had a statistically significant lower weight, height, calcium consumption and lumbar spine and total hip BMD and T-scores than those without a VFA-identified vertebral fracture (Table 1). Vertebral visualization and fracture identification on VFA In these 216 men, 93% of vertebrae from T4–L4 and 98% from T8–L4 were adequately visualized on VFA (Fig. 1). The percentage of vertebrae not visualized at T4, T5, and T6 levels was 42.1%, 26.9, and 13.0% respectively. Vertebral fractures were detected in 29.6% (64/216) of these men: 34 (53.1%) had grade 1 and 30 (46.8%) had grade 2 or 3. Twenty one of men with VFA-identified fracture (32.8%) had only a single vertebral fracture, while the other 67.2% had two or more. Fractures were most common in the mid-thoracic spine and at the thoraco-lumbar junction (Fig. 2). As would be expected, the prevalence of VFA-detected fractures globally increased with age and as BMD declined (Fig. 3). In this study population, 25% (n = 55) had normal BMD, 62% (n = 135) were osteopenic and 12% (n = 26) osteoporotic. Though numerically more VFA-identified fractures occurred in men with osteopenia, the fracture prevalence was higher (p b 0.0001) in men with lower BMD (Fig. 4). Interestingly, a fracture was identified on VFA in 21.8% of men with normal BMD. Stepwise regression analysis showed that presence of vertebral fracture was mainly related to the osteoporotic status (OR: 9.0; 95% CI: 3.5–22.8). Discussion

Fig. 4. Vertebral fracture prevalence by BMD diagnostic category and Genant grade.

About 30% of asymptomatic healthy men over 50 had a previously undiagnosed vertebral deformity. Sub-analysis of patients by grade of deformity revealed that 30 (13.8%) of the patients had vertebral deformities of Grade 2 and Grade 3. This prevalence of vertebral fractures in our population is similar to figures reported in western Caucasian populations as reported in a recent review [18] where prevalence of vertebral fracture (grades 2 and 3) is between 18% and 26%. This is also similar to the reported prevalence of vertebral fractures estimated at 12% in a sample of 150 healthy Lebanese men over 64 years [19]. The spine is a key fracture site [20]; however, it has been estimated that only 30% of vertebral fractures receive clinical attention (which means that the majority of patients with vertebral fractures remain undetected) [21,22]. It appears that only those patients with the most severe vertebral fractures come to clinical attention (it is likely that this is due to higher levels of back pain and disability). Moreover, even vertebral fractures that are visible on X-rays are commonly not reported by radiologists [23]. Under-diagnosis of vertebral fractures on spine X-rays has been observed worldwide, with false negative

A. El Maghraoui et al. / Bone 43 (2008) 544–548

interpretation rates of about 45% in North America, 46% in Latin America, and 29% in Europe/South Africa/Australia [24]. As many vertebral fractures are clinically unappreciated, but convey increased risk for future fracture, knowledge of existing fracture status is necessary for the optimal assessment of fracture risk [25,26]. Although spine radiographs are considered the gold standard for vertebral fracture detection, Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA) offers advantages including patient convenience, lower radiation exposure, cost effectiveness and ease of directly integrating knowledge of bone density and fracture status into prediction of future fracture probability, and thus in the therapeutic decision [11,27–29]. The main limiting factor in utilizing VFA is the legibility of the vertebrae. The difficulty is mostly seen in the upper thoracic vertebrae. However, so few osteoporotic fractures occur at this level [8]. Our work reports the ability to visualize a greater percentage of vertebral bodies than others in the field. This may be explained by two factors: 1.our technicians had been trained before for a long time in the performance of VFA, and 2. our study population is composed of “healthy” men. This study is the first large descriptive evaluation of VFA in a population of asymptomatic healthy men and documents that vertebral fractures are common when searched systematically and that these fractures are directly related to low BMD. In fact, as could be expected, the prevalence of vertebral fractures in this cohort of men was higher in those of older age and with lower BMD. However, similar to prior reports, numerically more fractures were observed in men with osteopenia. Importantly, approximately 14% of these men (with osteopenia) and 9% of men with normal BMD who otherwise may not have been identified as being at greater fracture risk were found to have unappreciated evident vertebral fracture (grades 2 and 3). It is well known in postmenopausal women that about half of fractures occur in patients without densitometric osteoporosis and that other factors than BMD may play a role [30]. In this case, recognition of vertebral fractures by imaging of the spine change the patient's diagnostic classification, estimation of fracture risk, and threshold for pharmacological intervention as treatment of patients with prevalent vertebral fractures reduces the risk of future fractures even when the baseline T-score is above the osteoporosis diagnostic cutpoint of −2.5. Thus, these data suggest that T-score (i.e., osteopenia) by DXA should receive consideration as an indication for performance of VFA in elderly men as it is now recommended by the ISCD [31]. The assessment of prevalent mild vertebral fractures is problematic, as although they represent a large proportion of the vertebral fractures [32], such deformities are sometimes considered as an expected effect of aging. Indeed, some of grade 1 fractures may be missed because physicians consider that there is only an expected effect of age, and because their clinical significance has been a subject of controversy. Actually this point is raised when such deformities are used to discriminate patients with or without osteoporosis [33]. However, in our study, excluding patients with Genant grade 1 did not change the results when comparing patients with and without vertebral fractures. Moreover, Mild vertebral fractures (grade 1) have been shown recently to be a risk factor for subsequent vertebral and non-vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis [34]. Vertebral deformities can be due to developmental abnormalities, Scheuermann's disease sequelae, and degenerative changes. Attention must be paid on osteoporotic depressions of the central end plates of the vertebrae, as osteoarthritic changes occur only on the anterior part of the vertebrae. The main difficulties are related to isolated short anterior vertebral heights at the mid-thoracic spine. The interpretation of such deformities must take into account degenerative changes of adjacent discs, and the presence of deformities of similar appearances on contiguous vertebrae, both signs being more in favor of a non-osteoporotic origin of the deformity. Vertebral fractures are unlikely to have identical aspect and occur more frequently to non-contiguous vertebrae, although these signs are not specific of

547

osteoporosis [35]. Thus, as we did in our study, the use of the semiquantitative method for fractures assessment needs a first step of visual identification of non-fracture deformities or normal variants, otherwise the method may be less specific than the quantitative approach. Fractures of the spine are associated with reduced pulmonary function, chronic back pain, loss of height, kyphosis, loss of selfesteem, abdominal discomfort, disability, loss of independence, and death [36]. The mortality rate five years after a clinical vertebral fracture is about 20% greater than expected, with mortality rates higher for men than women. Mortality rates increase with the number of vertebral fractures [37]. New vertebral fractures, even those that are not recognized clinically (i.e., morphometric fractures), are associated with substantial increases in back pain and functional limitations [38]. The presence of a vertebral fracture increases the relative risk of future vertebral fractures by about 4.4-fold, and increases the risk of fragility fractures at other skeletal sites as well [39,40]. The presence of a vertebral fracture is a risk factor for future fracture that is independent of BMD [41]. Thus, many societies interested in osteoporosis management recommend that patients with a prior vertebral fracture receive drug therapy regardless of BMD T-score [42]. Our study has strengths and limitations. The assessment of fracture was carefully conducted using standard procedures of acquisition, and standard reading of all VFA. All the morphometric assessments were made by two experienced investigators after training sessions and after a previous global visualization. Before diagnosis of fracture, a non-osteoporotic origin was considered for each deformity. However, even history of trauma was inquired, we cannot exclude that some subjects did not report remote traumas. The main limitation lies in the procedures used to select subjects, who were all volunteers and ambulatory, and presumably healthier than the general population. The Rabat population may not be adequately representative of the whole population. However, since the population living in the area of Rabat is a balanced mixture of the various regions constitutive of the country, we believe the impact on prevalence estimate is limited. In summary, VFA is a technology than can reliably and accurately diagnose vertebral fractures with greater patient convenience, less radiation exposure, and lower cost than standard spine radiography. Our results support the recommendation to perform VFA in elderly men referred for DXA measurement especially for whom the diagnosis of vertebral fracture is likely to influence clinical management and when BMD is low. References [1] Naves M, Diaz-Lopez JB, Gomez C, Rodriguez-Rebollar A, Serrano-Arias M, Cannata-Andia JB. Prevalence of osteoporosis in men and determinants of changes in bone mass in a non-selected Spanish population. Osteoporos Int 2005;16(6): 603–9. [2] Briggs AM, Greig AM, Wark JD. The vertebral fracture cascade in osteoporosis: a review of aetiopathogenesis. Osteoporos Int 2007;18(5):575–84. [3] Schuit SC, van der Klift M, Weel AE, et al. Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone 2004;34(1):195–202. [4] Ferrar L, Jiang G, Adams J, Eastell R. Identification of vertebral fractures: an update. Osteoporos Int 2005;16(7):717–28. [5] Genant HK, Wu CY, van Kuijk C, Nevitt MC. Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 1993;8(9):1137–48. [6] Jiang G, Eastell R, Barrington NA, Ferrar L. Comparison of methods for the visual identification of prevalent vertebral fracture in osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2004;15(11):887–96. [7] Genant HK, Li J, Wu CY, Shepherd JA. Vertebral fractures in osteoporosis: a new method for clinical assessment. J Clin Densitom 2000;3(3):281–90. [8] Damiano J, Kolta S, Porcher R, Tournoux C, Dougados M, Roux C. Diagnosis of vertebral fractures by vertebral fracture assessment. J Clin Densitom 2006;9(1): 66–71. [9] Ferrar L, Jiang G, Clowes JA, Peel NF, Eastell R. Comparison of densitometric and radiographic vertebral fracture assessment using the Algorithm-Based Qualitative (ABQ) method in postmenopausal women at low and high risk of fracture. J Bone Miner Res 2008;23(1):103–11. [10] Pavlov PW, Ginsburg J, Kicovic PM, van der Schaaf DB, Prelevic G, Bennink HJ. Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the effects of tibolone on bone mineral

548

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18] [19]

[20]

[21]

[22] [23]

[24]

[25]

A. El Maghraoui et al. / Bone 43 (2008) 544–548 density in postmenopausal osteoporotic women with and without previous fractures. Gynecol Endocrinol 1999;13(4):230–7. Lewiecki EM, Laster AJ. Clinical review: clinical applications of vertebral fracture assessment by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2006;91(11): 4215–22. El Maghraoui A, Guerboub AA, Mounach A, et al. Body mass index and gynecological factors as determinants of bone mass in healthy Moroccan women. Maturitas 2007;56(4):375–82. Gluer MG, Minne HW, Gluer CC, et al. Prospective identification of postmenopausal osteoporotic women at high vertebral fracture risk by radiography, bone densitometry, quantitative ultrasound, and laboratory findings: results from the PIOS study. J Clin Densitom 2005;8(4):386–95. Sornay-Rendu E, Munoz F, Garnero P, Duboeuf F, Delmas PD. Identification of osteopenic women at high risk of fracture: the OFELY study. J Bone Miner Res 2005;20(10):1813–9. Nevitt MC, Cummings SR, Stone KL, et al. Risk factors for a first-incident radiographic vertebral fracture in women N or = 65 years of age: the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 2005;20(1):131–40. El Maghraoui A, Achemlal L, Bezza A. Monitoring of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement in clinical practice. J Clin Densitom 2006;9(3): 281–6. El Maghraoui A, Do Santos Zounon AA, Jroundi I, et al. Reproducibility of bone mineral density measurements using dual X-ray absorptiometry in daily clinical practice. Osteoporos Int 2005;16(12):1742–8. Johnell O, Kanis J. Epidemiology of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 2005;16 (Suppl 2):S3–7. Baddoura R, Arabi A, Haddad-Zebouni S, et al. Vertebral fracture risk and impact of database selection on identifying elderly Lebanese with osteoporosis. Bone 2007;40(4):1066–72. Vallarta-Ast N, Krueger D, Wrase C, Agrawal S, Binkley N. An evaluation of densitometric vertebral fracture assessment in men. Osteoporos Int 2007;18(10): 1405–10. Grigoryan M, Guermazi A, Roemer FW, Delmas PD, Genant HK. Recognizing and reporting osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Eur Spine J 2003;12(Suppl 2): S104–S112. Guermazi A, Mohr A, Grigorian M, Taouli B, Genant HK. Identification of vertebral fractures in osteoporosis. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2002;6(3):241–52. Papaioannou A, Kennedy CC, Ioannidis G, et al. The osteoporosis care gap in men with fragility fractures: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Int 2008;19(4):581–7. Delmas PD, van de Langerijt L, Watts NB, et al. Underdiagnosis of vertebral fractures is a worldwide problem: the IMPACT study. J Bone Miner Res 2005;20(4): 557–63. Naves M, Diaz-Lopez JB, Gomez C, Rodriguez-Rebollar A, Rodriguez-Garcia M, Cannata-Andia JB. The effect of vertebral fracture as a risk factor for osteoporotic fracture and mortality in a Spanish population. Osteoporos Int 2003;14(6): 520–4.

[26] Lentle BC, Brown JP, Khan A, et al. Recognizing and reporting vertebral fractures: reducing the risk of future osteoporotic fractures. Can Assoc Radiol J 2007;58(1): 27–36. [27] Jacobs-Kosmin D, Sandorfi N, Murray H, Abruzzo JL. Vertebral deformities identified by vertebral fracture assessment: associations with clinical characteristics and bone mineral density. J Clin Densitom 2005;8(3):267–72. [28] Howat I, Carty D, Harrison J, Fraser M, McLellan AR. Vertebral fracture assessment in patients presenting with incident nonvertebral fractures. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2007;67(6):923–30. [29] Duboeuf F, Bauer DC, Chapurlat RD, Dinten JM, Delmas P. Assessment of vertebral fracture using densitometric morphometry. J Clin Densitom 2005;8((3):362–8. [30] El Maghraoui A, Roux C. DXA scanning in clinical practice. QJM Mar 10 2008 [Electronic publication ahead of print]. [31] Schousboe JT, Vokes T, Broy SB, et al. Vertebral fracture assessment: the 2007 ISCD official positions. J Clin Densitom 2008;11(1):92–108. [32] Ruyssen-Witrand A, Gossec L, Kolta S, Dougados M, Roux C. Vertebral dimensions as risk factor of vertebral fracture in osteoporotic patients: a systematic literature review. Osteoporos Int 2007;18(9):1271–8. [33] Rea JA, Li J, Blake GM, Steiger P, Genant HK, Fogelman I. Visual assessment of vertebral deformity by X-ray absorptiometry: a highly predictive method to exclude vertebral deformity. Osteoporos Int 2000;11(8):660–8. [34] Roux C, Fechtenbaum J, Kolta S, Briot K, Girard M. Mild prevalent and incident vertebral fractures are risk factors for new fractures. Osteoporos Int 2007;18(12): 1617–24. [35] Roux C, Fechtenbaum J, Briot K, Cropet C, Liu-Leage S, Marcelli C. Inverse relationship between vertebral fractures and spine osteoarthritis in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Ann Rheum Dis 2008;67(2):224–8. [36] Lindsay R, Burge RT, Strauss DM. One year outcomes and costs following a vertebral fracture. Osteoporos Int 2005;16(1):78–85. [37] Ensrud KE, Thompson DE, Cauley JA, et al. Prevalent vertebral deformities predict mortality and hospitalization in older women with low bone mass. Fracture intervention trial research group. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48(3):241–9. [38] O'Neill TW, Cockerill W, Matthis C, et al. Back pain, disability, and radiographic vertebral fracture in European women: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 2004;15(9):760–5. [39] Ismail AA, Cockerill W, Cooper C, et al. Prevalent vertebral deformity predicts incident hip though not distal forearm fracture: results from the European Prospective Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Int 2001;12(2):85–90. [40] Lindsay R, Silverman SL, Cooper C, et al. Risk of new vertebral fracture in the year following a fracture. JAMA 2001;285(3):320–3. [41] Hasserius R, Karlsson MK, Nilsson BE, Redlund-Johnell I, Johnell O. Prevalent vertebral deformities predict increased mortality and increased fracture rate in both men and women: a 10-year population-based study of 598 individuals from the Swedish cohort in the European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Int 2003;14(1):61–8. [42] Lewiecki EM. Review of guidelines for bone mineral density testing and treatment of osteoporosis. Curr Osteoporos Rep 2005;3(3):75–83.