Evidence Hub

HR‐pQCT Measures of Bone Microarchitecture Predict Fracture: Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

N. Mikolajewicz, N. Bishop, A. Burghardt, L. Folkestad, A. Hall, K. Kozloff, P. Lukey, M. Molloy-Bland et al.

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 2019

10,687 participants · 148 citations

Abstract

High‐resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR‐pQCT) is a noninvasive imaging modality for assessing volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and microarchitecture of cancellous and cortical bone. The objective was to (1) assess fracture‐associated differences in HR‐pQCT bone parameters; and (2) to determine if HR‐pQCT is sufficiently precise to reliably detect these differences in individuals. We systematically identified 40 studies that used HR‐pQCT (39/40 used XtremeCT scanners) to assess 1291 to 3253 and 3389 to 10,687 individuals with and without fractures, respectively, ranging in age from 10.9 to 84.7 years with no comorbid conditions. Parameters describing radial and tibial bone density, microarchitecture, and strength were extracted and percentage differences between fracture and control subjects were estimated using a random effects meta‐analysis. An additional meta‐analysis of short‐term in vivo reproducibility of bone parameters assessed by XtremeCT was conducted to determine whether fracture‐associated differences exceeded the least significant change (LSC) required to discern measured differences from precision error. Radial and tibial HR‐pQCT parameters, including failure load, were significantly altered in fracture subjects, with differences ranging from −2.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] −3.4 to −1.9) in radial cortical vBMD to −12.6% (95% CI −15.0 to −10.3) in radial trabecular vBMD. Fracture‐associated differences reported by prospective…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 10,687 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free