期刊文献+

多中心风湿病患者应用骨折风险评估模型评估骨折风险的临床分析 被引量:2

Clinical analysis of FRAX in the assessment of fracture risk in patients with rheumatic disease in three medical center
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的使用世界卫生组织(WHO)推荐的骨折风险评估模型(FRAX)评估风湿病患者骨折风险,以便早期预防风湿病患者骨质疏松性骨折的发生.方法收集2018年3至10月解放军总医院第四医学中心风湿科、中日友好医院风湿免疫科和积水潭医院风湿免疫科病例,共617例.617例中门诊风湿病组204例,住院风湿病组204例,健康对照组209例,比较3组间未来10年髋部骨折概率(PHF)和主要部位骨质疏松性骨折概率(PMOF),比较服用与不服用糖皮质激素风湿病患者骨折概率的差异以及使用FRAX评估骨折风险时采用或不采用股骨颈骨密度值之间的差异,同时对住院风湿病患者的PHF、PMOF与年龄、病程、性别、是否服用糖皮质激素、骨钙素、1型原胶原N-端前肽(PlNP)及β-胶原特殊序列(β-Crosslaps)进行相关性分析.结果门诊风湿病组、住院风湿病组及健康对照组10年内发生PMOF分别是3.455±2.690、2.973±2.149及3.323±1.828,3组之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),而PHF分别是0.986±1.619、0.515±0.873及0.149±0.311,3组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);随着年龄增大,PHF和PMOF逐渐增高;服用糖皮质激素风湿病患者的PMOF较未服用糖皮质激素者高(3.554±2.584比2.857±2.238,P<0.05);风湿病患者使用FRAX评估PHF和PMOF时采用或不采用股骨颈骨密度值间差异无统计学意义(3.012±2.231比3.207±2.601,P>0.05);住院风湿病患者PHF及PMOF与年龄、病程、服用糖皮质激素及骨钙素水平呈正相关,而PHF与P1NP呈负相关.结论风湿病患者较健康对照者未来10年PHF高,有更多的危险因素;服用糖皮质激素的风湿病患者PMOF升高;如无条件筛查股骨颈骨密度值,可直接使用FRAX评估骨折风险,同时可结合骨转换标记物,及时筛查和防治风湿病患者的骨质疏松性骨折. Objective The aim is to analyze the fracture risk in rheumatic patients by fracture risk assessment tool(FRAX),which is recommended by World Health Organization(WHO),so that we can prevent the occurrence of osteoporotic fracture earlier.Methods Totally 617 participants,204 out-patients with rheumatism,204 in-patients with rheumatism and 209 healthy controls,from March to October in 2018 of Fourth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital,Jishuitan Hospital and China-Japan Friendship Hospital,were enrolled in this study.The probability of hip fracture(PHF)and major osteoporotic fracture(PMOF)in 10 years with FRAX were compared,and the differences between taking sleroids or not and with or without bone mass density(BMD)of femoral neck were evaluated.Correlation analysis was conducted between PHF,PMOF and clinical information,including age,disease duration,gender,steroid usage,osteocalcin,P1NP andβ-crosslaps.Results There was no significant difference in PMOF within 10 years(3.455±2.690 vs 2.973±2.149 vs 3.323±1.828)among the three groups(P>0.05),but the PHF(0.986±1.619 vs 0.515±0.873 vs 0.149±0.311)was different(P<0.05).PHF and PMOF increased gradually with age.PMOF of patients without glucocorticoid therapy in 10 years was lower than that of patients with glucocorticoid(3.554±2.584 vs 2.857±2.238,P<0.05).There is no difference between the results of FRAX calculated with BMD or not(3.012±2.231 vs 3.207±2.601,P>0.05).PHF and PMOF were positively correlated with age,course of disease,glucocorticoid use and osteocalcin level,while PHF was negatively correlated with TP1NP among in-patients.Conclusion The prevalence of 10-year hip fracture calculated by FRAX in rheumatism patients is higher than that of healthy group.FRAX can be used to calculate fracture risk without BMD.Combination of FRAX and bone turnover markers may be more effective in prediction of osteoporotic fracture in rheumatic patients.
作者 叶彬 黄彦弘 章璐 田小兰 张清 卢敏辉 徐鹏慧 郭娟 孔祥艳 周惠琼 Ye Bin;Huang Yanhong;Zhang Lu;Tian Xiaolan;Zhang Qing;Lu Minhui;Xu Penghui;Guo Juan;Kong Xiangyan;Zhou Huiqiong(Department of Rheumatology,Fourth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital,Beijing 100048,China;Department of Rheumatology and Immunology,Jishuitan Hospital,Beijing 100096,China;Department of Rheumatology and Immunology,China-Japan Friendship Hospital,Beijing 100029,China)
出处 《中华医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2019年第42期3345-3349,共5页 National Medical Journal of China
关键词 风湿病 骨折风险评估模型 骨密度 骨折 危险因素 Rheumatism FRAX Bone mass density Fracture Risk factors
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献69

  • 1Silverman SL,Calderon AD.The utility and limitations of FRAX: A US perspective[J].Curr Osteoporos Rep,2010,8(4): 192-197.
  • 2van den Bergh JP,van Geel TA,Lems WF,et al.Assessment of individual fracture risk:FRAX and beyond[J].Curr Osteoporos Rep,2010,8(3) : 131-137.
  • 3Watts NB.The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX(R)): applications in clinical practice[J].J Womens Healtb(Larchmt), 2011,20(4) :525-531.
  • 4Zhang Z, Ou Y, Sheng Z, et al.How to decide intervention thresholds based on FRAX in central south Chinese post- menopausal women[J].Endocrine, 2013, [Epub ahead of print].
  • 5Alzahouri K,Bahrami S,Durand-Zaleski I,et al.Cost-effeetive- hess of osteoporosis treatments in postmenopausal women using FRAXTM thresholds for decision [J].Joint Bone Spine,2013,80 ( 1 ) : 64-69.
  • 6Kanis JA,Johnell O, Oden A,et al.FRAX and the assessment of fracture probability in men and women from the UK[J]. Osteoporos Int,2008,19(4) :385-397.
  • 7Kanis .IA, Oden A, Johansson H, et al.FRAX and its applications to clinical practice[J].Bone, 2009,44(5 ) : 734-743.
  • 8Tromollieres FA,Pouillas JM,Drewniak N,et al.Fracture risk prediction using BMD and clinical risk factors in early post- menopausal women: sensitivity of the WHO FRAX tool [J].J Bone Miner Res, 2010,25(5) : 1002-1009.
  • 9Bauer DC.FRAX, falls,and fracture prediction:predicting the future[J].Arch Intern Med, 2011,171 ( 18 ) : 1661 - 1662.
  • 10Schwartz AV, Vittinghoff E, Bauer DC,et al.Assoeiation of BMD and FRAX score with risk of fracture in older adults with type 2 diabetes[J].JAMA, 2011,305(21 ) : 2184-2192.

共引文献1389

同被引文献13

引证文献2

二级引证文献3

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部