Comparison of bone turnover suppression in atypical femoral fractures and osteoporotic hip fractures.
Humans
Female
Aged
Bone Remodeling
/ drug effects
Bone Density
Femoral Fractures
/ blood
Hip Fractures
Osteoporotic Fractures
/ etiology
Retrospective Studies
Middle Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Risk Factors
Biomarkers
/ blood
Bone Density Conservation Agents
/ therapeutic use
Diphosphonates
/ therapeutic use
Atypical femoral fracture
Bisphosphonate
Bone remodeling suppression
Bone turnover marker
Osteoporosis
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 08 2024
28 08 2024
Historique:
received:
19
12
2023
accepted:
23
08
2024
medline:
31
8
2024
pubmed:
31
8
2024
entrez:
28
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We aimed to compare the extent of bone turnover suppression between patients with atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) and osteoporotic hip fractures (typical femur fractures, TFFs) using a one-to-one matching strategy. A single-center retrospective comparison of females aged ≥ 60 years who underwent operative treatment for AFFs and TFFs between January 2010 and March 2021 was conducted. Demographic characteristics and clinical data including fracture site, past medical history, bone mineral density (BMD), bisphosphonate (BP) medication history, and serum bone turnover marker (BTM) levels were examined. Moreover, we performed a logistic regression analysis to determine the risk factors for AFFs and a one-to-one matched-pair analysis to compare various BTMs. Overall, 336 consecutive females were included: 113 with AFFs and 213 with TFFs. The mean age, BMI, and lowest BMD T-score were 78.6 years, 22.8 kg/m
Identifiants
pubmed: 39198602
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-71024-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-71024-y
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Bone Density Conservation Agents
0
Diphosphonates
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
19974Subventions
Organisme : National Research Foundation of Korea
ID : 2021R1A2C1012972
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Odvina, C. V. et al. Severely suppressed bone turnover: A potential complication of alendronate therapy. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 90, 1294–1301. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2004-0952 (2005).
doi: 10.1210/jc.2004-0952
pubmed: 15598694
Tano, A. et al. Potential bone fragility of mid-shaft atypical femoral fracture: Biomechanical analysis by a CT-based nonlinear finite element method. Injury 50, 1876–1882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.004 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.09.004
pubmed: 31519437
Haider, I. T., Schneider, P. S. & Edwards, W. B. The role of lower-limb geometry in the pathophysiology of atypical femoral fracture. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 17, 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-019-00525-x (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-019-00525-x
pubmed: 31410718
Nieves, J. W. & Cosman, F. Atypical subtrochanteric and femoral shaft fractures and possible association with bisphosphonates. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 8, 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-010-0007-2 (2010).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-010-0007-2
pubmed: 20425089
Shane, E. et al. Atypical subtrochanteric and diaphyseal femoral fractures: report of a task force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. J. Bone Miner. Res.: Off. J. Am. Soc. Bone Miner. Res. 25, 2267–2294. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.253 (2010).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.253
Gedmintas, L., Solomon, D. H. & Kim, S. C. Bisphosphonates and risk of subtrochanteric, femoral shaft, and atypical femur fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Bone Miner. Res. 28, 1729–1737. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1893 (2013).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1893
pubmed: 23408697
Aspenberg, P. & Schilcher, J. Atypical femoral fractures, bisphosphonates, and mechanical stress. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 12, 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-014-0200-9 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-014-0200-9
pubmed: 24615358
Black, D. M. et al. Atypical femur fracture risk versus fragility fracture prevention with bisphosphonates. N. Engl. J. Med. 383, 743–753. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1916525 (2020).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1916525
pubmed: 32813950
pmcid: 9632334
Saita, Y. et al. The fracture sites of atypical femoral fractures are associated with the weight-bearing lower limb alignment. Bone 66, 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2014.06.008 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.06.008
pubmed: 24933347
Kang, J. S. et al. Atypical femoral fractures after anti-osteoporotic medication: A Korean multicenter study. Int. Orthop. 38, 1247–1253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2259-9 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-2259-9
pubmed: 24464018
pmcid: 4037518
Lim, S. J. et al. Incidence, risk factors, and fracture healing of atypical femoral fractures: A multicenter case-control study. Osteoporos. Int. 29, 2427–2435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-018-4640-4 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s00198-018-4640-4
pubmed: 30039251
Giusti, A., Hamdy, N. A. & Papapoulos, S. E. Atypical fractures of the femur and bisphosphonate therapy: A systematic review of case/case series studies. Bone 47, 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2010.05.019 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2010.05.019
pubmed: 20493982
Shane, E. et al. Atypical subtrochanteric and diaphyseal femoral fractures: Second report of a task force of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. J. Bone Miner. Res.: Off. J. Am. Soc. Bone Miner. Res. 29, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.1998 (2014).
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1998
Byun, S. E., Lee, K. J., Shin, W. C., Moon, N. H. & Kim, C. H. The effect of teriparatide on fracture healing after atypical femoral fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos. Int. 34, 1323–1334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-023-06768-w (2023).
doi: 10.1007/s00198-023-06768-w
pubmed: 37095179
Jamal, S. A., Dion, N. & Ste-Marie, L. G. Atypical femoral fractures and bone turnover. N. Engl. J. Med. 365, 1261–1262. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1107029 (2011).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1107029
pubmed: 21991914
Iizuka, Y. et al. Bone turnover markers and the factors associated with atypical femur fractures among Japanese patients. Injury 47, 2484–2489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.09.031 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.09.031
pubmed: 27670281
Fisher, A., Fisher, L., Srikusalanukul, W. & Smith, P. N. Bone turnover status: Classification model and clinical implications. Int. J. Med. Sci. 15, 323–338. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.22747 (2018).
doi: 10.7150/ijms.22747
pubmed: 29511368
pmcid: 5835703
Starr, J., Tay, Y. K. D. & Shane, E. Current understanding of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of atypical femur fractures. Curr. Osteoporos. Rep. 16, 519–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-018-0464-6 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s11914-018-0464-6
pubmed: 29951870
pmcid: 6061199
Tile, L. & Cheung, A. M. Atypical femur fractures: Current understanding and approach to management. Ther. Adv. Musculoskelet. Dis. https://doi.org/10.1177/1759720X20916983 (2020).
doi: 10.1177/1759720X20916983
pubmed: 32913448
pmcid: 7443989
Stuart, E. A. Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Stat. Sci. 25, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1214/09-STS313 (2010).
doi: 10.1214/09-STS313
pubmed: 20871802
pmcid: 2943670
Austin, P. C. A comparison of 12 algorithms for matching on the propensity score. Stat. Med. 33, 1057–1069. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6004 (2014).
doi: 10.1002/sim.6004
pubmed: 24123228
Oh, Y. et al. Biological activity is not suppressed in mid-shaft stress fracture of the bowed femoral shaft unlike in “typical” atypical subtrochanteric femoral fracture: A proposed theory of atypical femoral fracture subtypes. Bone 137, 115453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bone.2020.115453 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115453
pubmed: 32470545
Griffin, L. V. et al. Bone nanomechanical properties and relationship to bone turnover and architecture in patients with atypical femur fractures: A prospective nested case-control study. JBMR Plus 5, e10523. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10523 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/jbm4.10523
pubmed: 34532612
pmcid: 8441274
Recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: 2001 update. American college of rheumatology Ad Hoc committee on glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Arthr. Rheum. 44, 1496–1503. (2001).
Canalis, E., Mazziotti, G., Giustina, A. & Bilezikian, J. P. Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: Pathophysiology and therapy. Osteoporos. Int. 18, 1319–1328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-007-0394-0 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s00198-007-0394-0
pubmed: 17566815
Takakubo, Y. et al. The incidence of atypical femoral fractures in patients with rheumatic disease: Yamagata prefectural committee of atypical femoral fractures (YamaCAFe) study. Tohoku J. Exp. Med. 242, 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1620/tjem.242.327 (2017).
doi: 10.1620/tjem.242.327
pubmed: 28883214
Somford, M. P. et al. Bilateral fractures of the femur diaphysis in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis on long-term treatment with alendronate: Clues to the mechanism of increased bone fragility. J. Bone Miner. Res. 24, 1736–1740. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.090408 (2009).
doi: 10.1359/jbmr.090408
pubmed: 19419297
Sato, H. et al. Cumulative incidence of femoral localized periosteal thickening (beaking) preceding atypical femoral fractures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoporos. Int. 32, 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05601-y (2021).
doi: 10.1007/s00198-020-05601-y
pubmed: 32885317
Cho, D. H., Chung, J. O., Chung, M. Y., Cho, J. R. & Chung, D. J. Reference intervals for bone turnover markers in Korean healthy women. J. Bone Metab. 27, 43–52 (2020).
doi: 10.11005/jbm.2020.27.1.43
pubmed: 32190608
pmcid: 7064366