FRAX-based intervention and assessment thresholds in seven Latin American countries

Age-specific intervention and assessment thresholds were developed for seven Latin American countries. The intervention threshold ranged from 1.2% (Ecuador) to 27.5% (Argentina) at the age of 50 and 90 years, respectively. In the Latin American countries, FRAX offers a substantial advance for the detection of subjects at high fracture risk.INTRODUCTION:Intervention thresholds are proposed using the Fracture Risk Assessment (FRAX) tool. We recommended their use to calculate the ten-year probability of fragility fracture (FF) in both, men and women with or without the inclusion of bone mineral density (BMD). The purpose of this study is to compute FRAX-based intervention and BMD assessment thresholds for seven Latin American countries in men and women ≥ 40 years.METHODS:The intervention threshold (IT) was set at a 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) equivalent to a woman with a prior FF and a body mass index (BMI) equal to 25.0 kg/m2 without BMD or other clinical risk factors. The lower assessment threshold was set at a 10-year probability of a MOF in women with BMI equal to 25.0 kg/m2, no previous fracture and no clinical risk factors. The upper assessment threshold was set at 1.2 times the IT.RESULTS:For the seven LA countries, the age-specific IT varied from 1.5 to 27.5% in Argentina, 3.8 to 25.2% in Brazil, 1.6 up to 20.0% in Chile, 0.6 to 10.2% in Colombia, 0.9 up to 13.6% in Ecuador, 2.6 to 20.0% in Mexico, and 0.7 up to 22.0% in Venezuela at the age of 40 and 90 years, respectively.CONCLUSIONS:In the LA countries, FRAX-based IT offers a substantial advance for the detection of men and women at high fracture risk, particularly in the elderly. The heterogeneity of IT between the LA countries indicates that country-specific FRAX models are appropriate rather than a global LA model (AU)

Semen and urine culture in the diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of semen and urine culture in the diagnosis of chronic bacterial prostatitis (CBP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 70 consecutive men suspected of having chronic bacterial prostatitis along with 17 asymptomatic controls, we obtained urine and semen cultures followed 1 week later by the Meares and Stamey test, our reference standard. The interpretation of each of the cultures was blind to the results of other tests. RESULTS: 139 men were referred for evaluation of chronic bacterial prostatitis and 70 received all tests. Additionally, 17 control men volunteered to participate. The Meares and Stamey Test was positive in 69 (79 percent) patients. The semen culture had a sensitivity of 45 percent and a specificity of 94 percent. The likelihood ratio associated with a positive semen culture was 8.1 (95 percent confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 55.3); the likelihood ratio associated with a negative semen culture was 0.6 (95 percent CI 0.5 to 0.7). The urine culture had a sensitivity of 4 percent and a specificity of 100 percent. The likelihood ratio of a positive urine culture was infinity and of a negative urine culture was 0.96 (95 percent CI 0.9 to 1). CONCLUSIONS: While a positive semen culture in a symptomatic patient may suffice to select and start antibiotic treatment against chronic bacterial prostatitis, a negative culture does not rule out the condition. Urine cultures alone are not useful for diagnosing CBP. The Meares and Stamey test remains important for the diagnosis of CBP in practice.