Vertebral Dimensions As Risk Factor of Vertebral Fracture in Osteoporotic Patients: a Systematic Literature Review

Overview

Journal Osteoporos Int

Specialties Endocrinology
Orthopedics

Date 2007 Mar 7

PMID 17340217

Citations 37

Authors

A Ruyssen-Witrand

L Gossec

S Kolta

M Dougados

C Roux

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Unlabelled: This systematic literature review studied the potential association between vertebral fracture risk and vertebral dimensions. Analysis showed that patients with vertebral fractures have smaller non-fractured vertebrae than patients without fractures. Vertebral size is an independent risk factor of vertebral fractures.

Introduction: Biomechanical factors such as vertebral dimensions may be a risk factor for vertebral fractures beside bone mineral density (BMD). The objective of this study was to evaluate potential association of vertebral size and shape with osteoporotic fracture risk through a systematic literature review.

Methods: Systematic analysis of published reports comparing vertebral dimensions of patients with and without osteoporotic fractures was performed. Data sources were electronic databases. Data extraction included methods, site, reproducibility and results of vertebral measurement, study population characteristics. It was noted if populations were matched or data were adjusted for age, height, weight and BMD.

Results: Of 634 reports identified by the literature search, the final review included 13 reports studying 4,428 women and 508 men; median age 64.2 years [range 51.7%-73.0%]. Measurements were performed with computed tomography scan, X-ray, or dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Vertebral body height, width, depth, area, cross-sectional area (CSA), and volume were 5.5% to 9.5% smaller in fractured group than control group. After adjustment for confounding factors, area, CSA and volume were, respectively, 10.2% [range 7.1%-13.3%], 7.7% [range 1.2%-14.2%] and 9.5% [8.5%-10.5%] smaller in fractured group.

Conclusions: Vertebral size should be considered as a potential independent vertebral fracture risk factor.

Citing Articles

Lumbar muscle involvement in the occurrence of osteoporotic vertebral fracture.

Lambeaux C, Lapegue F, Fayolle H, Degboe Y, Chiavassa-Gandois H, Basselerie H Res Diagn Interv Imaging. 2024; 9:100037.

PMID: 39076584 PMC: 11265192. DOI: 10.1016/j.redii.2023.100037.

Analyzing lumbar vertebral shape and alignment in female patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis: Comparisons with spinal stenosis and risk factor exploration.

Yoshihara T, Morimoto T, Tsukamoto M, Toda Y, Hirata H, Kobayashi T PLoS One. 2024; 19(4):e0301974.

PMID: 38626167 PMC: 11020370. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301974.

[Secondary fracture prevention/Update osteoporosis guidelines 2023 of the Umbrella Organization Osteology].

Stumpf U, Schmidmaier R Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb). 2024; 127(4):283-289.

PMID: 38526813 DOI: 10.1007/s00113-024-01415-3.

The Role of Vertebral Morphometry in the Pathogenesis of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Abbas J, Peled N, Hershkovitz I, Hamoud K Biomed Res Int. 2021; 2021:7093745.

PMID: 34527742 PMC: 8437646. DOI: 10.1155/2021/7093745.

The association between physical activity and vertebral dimension change in early adulthood - The Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986 study.

Autio E, Oura P, Karppinen J, Paananen M, Junno J, Niinimaki J Bone Rep. 2021; 14:101060.

PMID: 33981808 PMC: 8085667. DOI: 10.1016/j.bonr.2021.101060.

References

Duan Y, Turner C, Kim B, Seeman E . Sexual dimorphism in vertebral fragility is more the result of gender differences in age-related bone gain than bone loss. J Bone Miner Res. 2002; 16(12):2267-75. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2001.16.12.2267. View

Melton 3rd L, Kan S, Frye M, Wahner H, OFallon W, Riggs B . Epidemiology of vertebral fractures in women. Am J Epidemiol. 1989; 129(5):1000-11. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115204. View

Link T, Doren M, Lewing G, Meier N, Heinecke A, Rummeny E . Cross-sectional area of lumbar vertebrae in peri- and postmenopausal patients with and without osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2000; 11(4):304-9. DOI: 10.1007/s001980070118. View

Sone T, Tomomitsu T, Miyake M, Takeda N, Fukunaga M . Age-related changes in vertebral height ratios and vertebral fracture. Osteoporos Int. 1997; 7(2):113-8. DOI: 10.1007/BF01623685. View

Carter D, Bouxsein M, Marcus R . New approaches for interpreting projected bone densitometry data. J Bone Miner Res. 1992; 7(2):137-45. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.5650070204. View

Duan Y, Wang X, Evans A, Seeman E . Structural and biomechanical basis of racial and sex differences in vertebral fragility in Chinese and Caucasians. Bone. 2005; 36(6):987-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2004.11.016. View

Biggemann M, Hilweg D, Brinckmann P . Prediction of the compressive strength of vertebral bodies of the lumbar spine by quantitative computed tomography. Skeletal Radiol. 1988; 17(4):264-9. DOI: 10.1007/BF00401809. View

Wu X, Liao E, Liu S, Zhang H, Shan P, Cao X . Relationship of body surface area with bone density and its risk of osteoporosis at various skeletal regions in women of mainland China. Osteoporos Int. 2004; 15(9):751-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-004-1608-3. View

Duan Y, Seeman E, Turner C . The biomechanical basis of vertebral body fragility in men and women. J Bone Miner Res. 2002; 16(12):2276-83. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.2001.16.12.2276. View

10.

Mosekilde L . Sex differences in age-related loss of vertebral trabecular bone mass and structure--biomechanical consequences. Bone. 1989; 10(6):425-32. DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(89)90074-4. View

11.

Nielsen S, Hermansen F, Barenholdt O . Interpretation of lumbar spine densitometry in women with fractures. Osteoporos Int. 1993; 3(5):276-82. DOI: 10.1007/BF01623833. View

12.

Schultz A, Andersson G . Analysis of loads on the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1981; 6(1):76-82. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198101000-00017. View

13.

Krolner B . Osteoporosis and normality: how to express the bone mineral content of lumbar vertebrae. Clin Physiol. 1982; 2(2):139-46. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-097x.1982.tb00016.x. View

14.

Sievanen H, Kannus P, Nieminen V, Heinonen A, Oja P, Vuori I . Estimation of various mechanical characteristics of human bones using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: methodology and precision. Bone. 1996; 18(1 Suppl):17S-27S. DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(95)00376-2. View

15.

Brinckmann P, Biggemann M, Hilweg D . Prediction of the compressive strength of human lumbar vertebrae. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989; 14(6):606-10. View

16.

Johnell O, ONeill T, Felsenberg D, Kanis J, Cooper C, Silman A . Anthropometric measurements and vertebral deformities. European Vertebral Osteoporosis Study (EVOS) Group. Am J Epidemiol. 1997; 146(4):287-93. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009269. View

17.

Seeman E, Hopper J, Bach L, Cooper M, Parkinson E, McKay J . Reduced bone mass in daughters of women with osteoporosis. N Engl J Med. 1989; 320(9):554-8. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198903023200903. View

18.

Deng H, Xu F, Davies K, Heaney R, Recker R . Differences in bone mineral density, bone mineral content, and bone areal size in fracturing and non-fracturing women, and their interrelationships at the spine and hip. J Bone Miner Metab. 2002; 20(6):358-66. DOI: 10.1007/s007740200052. View

19.

Ross P, Huang C, Davis J, Wasnich R . Vertebral dimension measurements improve prediction of vertebral fracture incidence. Bone. 1995; 16(4 Suppl):257S-262S. DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(94)00021-q. View

20.

Peacock M, Turner C, Liu G, Manatunga A, Timmerman L, JOHNSTON Jr C . Better discrimination of hip fracture using bone density, geometry and architecture. Osteoporos Int. 1995; 5(3):167-73. DOI: 10.1007/BF02106096. View