Risk of Subsequent Hip Fractures across Varying Treatment Patterns for Index Vertebral Compression Fractures.

Introduction: Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) pose a considerable healthcare burden and are linked to elevated morbidity and mortality. Despite available anti-osteoporotic treatments (AOTs), guideline adherence is lacking. This study aims to evaluate subsequent hip fracture incidence after index VCF and to elucidate AOT prescribing patterns in VCF patients, further assessing the impact of surgical interventions on these patterns. Materials and Methods: Patients with index VCFs between 2010 and 2021 were identified using the PearlDiver database. Diagnostic and procedural data were recorded using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9, ICD-10) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Patients under age 50 and follow-up

Declining Trend in Anti-osteoporotic Treatment, Despite a Rise in DEXA Screening Following "Sentinel" Distal Radius Fractures.

PURPOSE: To understand national trends and costs associated with the utilization of anti-osteoporotic medication and DEXA screening within the year following a sentinel/primary distal radius fracture. METHODS: The 2008-2015Q1 Humana Administrative Claims database was queried to identify patients aged ≥50 years, with a "sentinel" occurrence of a primary closed distal radius fracture. Linear regression models were used to report and assess for significant trends in utilization of anti-osteoporotic medication and DEXA screenings within the year following the fracture. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess for factors associated with receiving or not receiving anti-osteoporotic medication. RESULTS: A total of 14 526 sentinel distal radius fractures were included in the study. Only 7.2% (n = 1046) of patients received anti-osteoporosis medication in the year following the distal radius fracture. Treatment with medication for osteoporosis declined from 8.2% in 2008 to 5.9% in 2015, whereas the rate of DEXA screening increased from 14.8% in 2008 to 23.6% in 2015. The most common prescribed treatment was alendronate sodium (n = 835; 79.8%-$49/patient). Factors associated with increased odds of receiving anti-osteoporotic medication were age 70 to 79 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; P = .014), age 80 to 89 years (OR, 1.66; P = .001), Asian (OR, 2.95; P = .002) or Hispanic (OR, 1.77; P = .006) ethnicity, belonging to South (OR, 1.19; P = .029) or West (OR, 1.37; P = .010), and having an Elixhauser Comorbidity Index score of 3 (OR, 2.14; P = .024) or > 3 (OR, 2.05; P = .022). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a rising utilization of DEXA screening following "sentinel" distal radius fractures, the proportion of individuals who receive anti-osteoporotic treatment is decreasing over time.

Comorbidity and osteoporotic fracture: approach through predictive modeling techniques using the OSTEOMED registry.

PURPOSE: To examine the response to anti-osteoporotic treatment, considered as incident fragility fractures after a minimum follow-up of 1 year, according to sex, age, and number of comorbidities of the patients. METHODS: For this retrospective observational study, data from baseline and follow-up visits on the number of comorbidities, prescribed anti-osteoporotic treatment and vertebral, humerus or hip fractures in 993 patients from the OSTEOMED registry were analyzed using logistic regression and an artificial network model. RESULTS: Logistic regression showed that the probability of reducing fractures for each anti-osteoporotic treatment considered was independent of sex, age, and the number of comorbidities, increasing significantly only in males taking vitamin D (OR = 7.918), patients without comorbidities taking vitamin D (OR = 4.197) and patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities taking calcium (OR = 9.412). Logistic regression correctly classified 96% of patients (Hosmer-Lemeshow = 0.492) compared with the artificial neural network model, which correctly classified 95% of patients (AUC = 0.6). CONCLUSION: In general, sex, age and the number of comorbidities did not influence the likelihood that a given anti-osteoporotic treatment improved the risk of incident fragility fractures after 1 year, but this appeared to increase when patients had been treated with risedronate, strontium or teriparatide. The two models used classified patients similarly, but predicted differently in terms of the probability of improvement, with logistic regression being the better fit.

Health-related quality of life in men with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The increased social and economic burdens make osteoporosis in men an emerging public health issue. However, the quality of life among men with osteoporosis is still unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among men with osteoporosis or osteoporotic fracture. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database were systematically searched from inception to May 2021. Studies were included if they used validated questionnaires to measure HRQoL among osteoporotic men. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model or fixed-effects model to calculate the standard mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidential interval (95% CI). RESULTS: 14 studies involving 6338 male participants were chosen for systematic review, of which 10 were included in the meta-analysis. Men with osteoporosis had poorer global HRQoL and multiple dimensions of HRQoL than men without osteoporosis. Hip fracture, vertebral fractures, or wrist fractures dramatically impaired HRQoL of men, and physical function was declined even before hip fracture (SMD = -0.60, 95% CI, -0.82 to -0.39). Femoral and lumbar BMD was positively correlated with HRQoL, and a number of fragility fractures and time since fracture had negative effects on HRQoL. Effective anti-osteoporotic drugs could improve HRQoL of men. CONCLUSION: The health-related life quality of men was significantly impaired by osteoporosis and fracture of the hip, vertebral, or wrist. We should pay more attention to the diagnosis and treatment of male osteoporosis to improve the life quality of men.

Adherence to Anti-Osteoporotic Treatment and Clinical Implications after Hip Fracture: A Systematic Review.

The role of anti-osteoporotic treatment as part of the secondary prevention after hip fracture in terms of mortality and re-fracture risk has been studied, and the results are promising. Decreased treatment adherence and compliance is a problem that needs to be addressed by healthcare professionals. A systematic review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database with terms that included hip fracture, mortality, second fracture, and specific anti-osteoporotic treatment. We included 28 articles, 21 regarding mortality and 20 re-fracture rates in hip fracture patients. All studies showed lower mortality after hip fracture associated with anti-osteoporotic treatment, mostly bisphosphonate agents. The re-fracture risk is still debatable, since conflicting data were found. Although most of the studies showed notable effects on mortality and re-fracture rates associated with anti-osteoporotic treatment, we still need more data to validate the actual results.

Intensive screening for osteoporosis in patients with hip fracture.

Opportunities to evaluate, treat, and prevent future osteoporotic fractures are often being overlooked, especially in patients with a prior osteoporotic fracture. We find that an intensive outreach osteoporosis investigation strategy can help increase the number of patients investigated and treated for osteoporosis following a hip fracture. PURPOSE: Patients experiencing a hip fracture are subject to an increased risk of subsequent fractures. This suggests an urgent need to develop strategies that will allow a higher number of patients with fragility hip fractures to be investigated and treated for osteoporosis. In accordance, we developed a secondary osteoporosis prevention program and evaluated the results of the program. METHODS: In the study period, 1071 patients with a hip fracture were admitted to Hvidovre University Hospital. Eligible patients were offered an osteoporosis investigation program, which included a DXA-scan with vertebral fracture assessment and a medical consultation. The data retrieved from this program were registered and analyzed. The primary goal of the study was to describe the number of subjects, who completed the program, and to characterize the initiated osteoporosis treatment. Secondary outcomes evaluated were prevalence of DXA-verified osteoporosis, changes in T-score due to treatment, and 1-year mortality rate. RESULTS: In total, 557 patients were offered participation of which 333 patients completed the full program. Among these, 159 patients had DXA-verified osteoporosis and 192 patients were started treatment. This resulted in a significant higher T-score at the lumbar spine and femoral neck compared with subjects not treated. Additionally, we report a 1-year mortality rate of 27.7% among all patients with hip fracture. CONCLUSION: We report that an intensive outreach osteoporosis investigation program can help increase the number of hip fracture patients being tested and treated for osteoporosis. Further, the initiation of treatment can significantly increase the T-score.

Failure in diagnosis and under-treatment of osteoporosis in elderly patients with fragility fractures.

We evaluated whether osteoporosis is adequately managed and treated in patients suffering from fragility fractures. Factors that influenced osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment rates were also assessed. To this end, patients with the principal diagnosis of low-energy hip, vertebral, or distal radius fractures were recruited for the study. Collected data included risk factors for osteoporosis, history of previous fractures, known history of osteoporosis, and osteoporosis treatment at the time of admission. The patients' prefracture risk profile was also assessed to determine whether osteoporosis could have been identified prior to the index fracture. We identified 308 patients with fragility fractures, including 214 hip, 41 vertebral, and 53 distal radius fractures. Overall, 238 patients (77.3%) had at least one risk factor for osteoporosis. Eighty-eight patients (28.6%) had sustained ≥ 1 prior fragility fractures in the past. However, only 79 patients (25.6%) were aware that they had osteoporosis and even fewer (66 patients, 21.4%) had been receiving osteoporosis treatment preceding the current admission. Anti-osteoporotic agents were more commonly prescribed in patients 66-75 years old (p = 0.008), with a family history of osteoporosis (p = 0.009) or history of a prior fragility fracture (p = 0.012). The treatment rate was higher in women than men (p = 0.026) and in patients with vertebral or multiple prior fractures compared to patients with prior hip fractures. The current study provides evidence that individuals who experience fragility fractures are not adequately managed for osteoporosis. Only few of the historically known risk factors for osteoporosis were adequately recognized and associated with osteoporosis evaluation and treatment.

[Use of CTX-I and PINP as bone turnover markers: National Bone Health Alliance recommendations to standardize sample handling and patient preparation to reduce pre-analytical variability]. / PINP et CTX-I utilisés comme marqueurs du remodelage osseux : recommandations de la National bone health alliance pour réduire la variabilité pré-analytique.

The International osteoporosis foundation and the International federation of clinical chemistry (IFCC) Bone marker standards working group have identified N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX-I) in blood to be the reference markers of bone turnover for the fracture risk prediction and monitoring of osteoporosis treatment. Although used in clinical research for many years, bone turnover markers (BTM) have not been widely adopted in clinical practice primarily due to their poor within-subject and between-lab reproducibility. The NBHA bone turnover marker project team aim to reduce pre-analytical variability of CTX-I and PINP measurements through standardized sample handling and patient preparation. Recommendations for sample handling and patient preparations were made based on review of available publications and pragmatic considerations to reduce pre-analytical variability. Controllable and un-controllable patient-related factors were reviewed to facilitate interpretation and sample collection. Samples for CTX-I must be collected consistently in the morning hours in the fasted state. EDTA plasma is preferred for CTX-I for its greater sample stability. Sample collection conditions for PINP are less critical as PINP has minimal circadian variability and is not affected by food intake. Sample stability limits should be observed. The uncontrollable aspects (age, sex, pregnancy, immobility, recent fracture, co-morbidities, anti-osteoporotic drugs, other medications) should be considered in BTM interpretation. Adopting standardized sample handling and patient preparation procedures will significantly reduce controllable pre-analytical variability. The successful adoption of such recommendations necessitates the close collaboration of various stakeholders at the global stage, including the laboratories, the medical community, the reagent manufacturers and the regulatory agencies.

Use of CTX-I and PINP as bone turnover markers: National Bone Health Alliance recommendations to standardize sample handling and patient preparation to reduce pre-analytical variability.

The National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA) recommends standardized sample handling and patient preparation for C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX-I) and N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) measurements to reduce pre-analytical variability. Controllable and uncontrollable patient-related factors are reviewed to facilitate interpretation and minimize pre-analytical variability. INTRODUCTION: The IOF and the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) Bone Marker Standards Working Group have identified PINP and CTX-I in blood to be the reference markers of bone turnover for the fracture risk prediction and monitoring of osteoporosis treatment. Although used in clinical research for many years, bone turnover markers (BTM) have not been widely adopted in clinical practice primarily due to their poor within-subject and between-lab reproducibility. The NBHA Bone Turnover Marker Project team aim to reduce pre-analytical variability of CTX-I and PINP measurements through standardized sample handling and patient preparation. METHODS: Recommendations for sample handling and patient preparations were made based on review of available publications and pragmatic considerations to reduce pre-analytical variability. Controllable and un-controllable patient-related factors were reviewed to facilitate interpretation and sample collection. RESULTS: Samples for CTX-I must be collected consistently in the morning hours in the fasted state. EDTA plasma is preferred for CTX-I for its greater sample stability. Sample collection conditions for PINP are less critical as PINP has minimal circadian variability and is not affected by food intake. Sample stability limits should be observed. The uncontrollable aspects (age, sex, pregnancy, immobility, recent fracture, co-morbidities, anti-osteoporotic drugs, other medications) should be considered in BTM interpretation. CONCLUSION: Adopting standardized sample handling and patient preparation procedures will significantly reduce controllable pre-analytical variability. The successful adoption of such recommendations necessitates the close collaboration of various stakeholders at the global stage, including the laboratories, the medical community, the reagent manufacturers and the regulatory agencies.

Pathomechanisms and management of osteoporotic pain with no traumatic evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is a pathological state with an unbalanced bone metabolism mainly caused by accelerated osteoporotic osteoclast activity due to a postmenopausal estrogen deficiency, and it causes some kinds of pain, which can be divided into two types: traumatic pain due to a fragility fracture from impaired rigidity, and pain derived from an osteoporotic pathology without evidence of fracture. We aimed to review the concepts of osteoporosis-related pain and its management. METHODS: We reviewed clinical and basic articles on osteoporosis-related pain, especially with a focus on the mechanism of pain derived from an osteoporotic pathology (i.e., osteoporotic pain) and its pharmacological treatment. RESULTS: Osteoporosis-related pain tends to be robust and acute if it is due to fracture or collapse, whereas pathology-related osteoporotic pain is vague and dull. Non-traumatic osteoporotic pain can originate from an undetectable microfracture or structural change such as muscle fatigue in kyphotic patients. Furthermore, basic studies have shown that the osteoporotic state itself is related to pain or hyperalgesia with increased pain-related neuropeptide expression or acid-sensing channels in the local tissue and nervous system. Traditional treatment for osteoporotic pain potentially prevents possible fracture-induced pain by increasing bone mineral density and affecting related mediators such as osteoclasts and osteoblasts. The most common agent for osteoporotic pain management is a bisphosphonate. Other non-osteoporotic analgesic agents such as celecoxib have also been reported to have a suppressive effect on osteoporotic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoporotic pain has traumatic and non-traumatic factors. Anti-osteoporotic treatments are effective for osteoporotic pain, as they improve bone structure and the condition of the pain-related sensory nervous system. Physicians should always consider these matters when choosing a treatment strategy that would best benefit patients with osteoporotic pain.

[Post-menopausal osteoporosis: Up-to-date]. / Actualités du traitement de l'ostéoporose post-ménopausique.

Patients with a high risk of fragility fractures, and those with recent fractures, must receive the highest priority for anti-osteoporotic treatment, because of the consequences of some of these fractures (hip, vertebrae, pelvis, humerus). Both non pharmacological and pharmacological treatments must be used. The duration of the treatment is based on the assessment of fracture risk.