Evidence Hub

Osteoporosis and fractures in systemic vasculitides: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Angelo Fassio, A. Berti, A. Mantovani, G. Adami, F. Pollastri, D. Gatti, R. Bixio, Valeria Messina et al.

Frontiers in Immunology, 2025

23,358 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Background/aim We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies aimed at investigating the prevalence of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures in subjects affected by systemic vasculitides (SVs) as well as to explore their risk of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures when compared to healthy controls. Methods Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed were systematically searched from inception to February 2024 for observational studies investigating the prevalence of osteoporosis and fragility fractures in adults with SVs. In addition, when available, we assessed the odd ratios (OR) of prevalent osteoporosis and fragility fractures amongst subjects with SVs vs. healthy controls. Data from eligible studies were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to obtain ORs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were also performed. This study was registered in Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/3G7RJ). Results Forty studies with 23,358 individuals affected by SVs were included. The overall prevalence of osteoporosis and fragility fractures in the SV patients were respectively 14.64% (95%CI 12.21-18.89), and 17.08% (95%CI 11.42-24.78). The ORs for osteoporosis and fragility fractures in SV patients when compared with healthy controls were 2.92 (95%CI 1.72-4.98) and 2.39 (95%CI 1.34-4.26) respectively. The univariable meta-regression analysis showed a significant…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, 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: 23,358 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