AB0827 Comparison of the capability of radial bone mineral density and calcaneal quantitative ultrasound variables in the identification of men with osteoporosis
Authors: A Oral, D Sindel, A Yaliman, S Asghari Kaleibar, S Esmaeilzadeh
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2017)

<h3>Background</h3> Bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is considered the gold standard for the management of osteoporosis. Recently, quantitative ultrasound (QUS), which is easy to use, inexpensive, portable, does not use ionizing radiation, and has also been shown to provide information about bone quality and to predict fracture risk, has gained growing interest in this area. <h3>Objectives</h3> The aim of this study was to compare the capability of one-third radius (33% radius) DXA BMD measurements and calcaneal QUS (cQUS) variables for identifying axial osteoporosis as measured by DXA in men. <h3>Methods</h3> Axial BMD measurements at the lumbar spine and at the hip (femoral neck and total hip), 1/3 radius BMD of the non-dominant forearm were made using DXA and cQUS variables at both sides as measured twice were obtained in 179 men aged between 24 and 85 years. Osteoporosis was defined based on the WHO criteria in men aged 50 and over, a man having been considered as osteoporotic in the presence of a T-score ≤-2.5 in any of the axial regions measured. For defining axial osteoporosis or BMD below the expected range for age, Z-scores of ≤-2.0 were used in men younger than the age of 50 years. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to assess the osteoporosis identification capability of measurements. <h3>Results</h3> The areas under ROC curves (AUCs) for 1/3 radius BMD, its T-score, the lowest means (as calculated as the mean of the two calcaneal QUS measurements for each heel) of quantitative ultrasound index (QUI), QUI T-score, broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA), speed of sound (SOS), and estimated heel BMD (eBMD) for identifying axial osteoporosis or BMD below the expected range were found as 0.755, 0.767, 0.760, 0.758, 0.717, 0.768, and 0.764 (p&lt;0.001 for all), respectively. <h3>Conclusions</h3> In conclusion, AUCs pointed to similar (for QUI, QUI T-score, and eBMD) or even better (for SOS) osteoporosis discriminative capability of cQUS variables in comparison to radial DXA BMD variables. These findings may have implications that cQUS variables, particularly SOS, may be used for the identification of osteoporosis in men whose axial BMD cannot be measured by DXA due to certain circumstances as well as in circumstances where DXA is not available. <h3>References</h3> Marín F, González-Macías J, Díez-Pérez A, Palma S, Delgado-Rodríguez M. Relationship between bone quantitative ultrasound and fractures: a meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Res 2006;21:1126–35. Moayyeri A, Adams JE, Adler RA, Krieg MA, Hans D, Compston J, Lewiecki EM. Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 2012;23:143–53. Kilappa V, Moilanen P, Xu L, Nicholson PH, Timonen J, Cheng S. Low-frequency axial ultrasound velocity correlates with bone mineral density and cortical thickness in the radius and tibia in pre- and postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 2011;22:1103–1113. <h3>Disclosure of Interest</h3> None declared