• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.132-136
• /
• 2009

Purpose: WHO(world health organization) announced the FRAX Tool(fracture risk assessment) of new software in the beginning of 2008. FRAX Tool was considered various risk factor, being different from existing fracture risk. In this study, we wanted to know the fracture risk of following the changing of the risk factor of fracture. Materials and Methods: A total of 50 women aged 50~60 were studied. We measured BMD at the part of femur neck which was based on the age, weight, height of individual with GE, Lunar-prodigy. The control group is fracture risk without considering fracture risk factor. The experimental group is previous fracture, parent fracture, current smoking, glucocorticoid, rheumatoid arthritis, secondary osteoporosis, alcohol. if each items makes one 'existence', others are all 'nothing'. and the results produced major osteoporotic region and hip fracture risk in 10-years. Statistics used t-test of SPSS 12.0. Results: The average rate of increment of major osteoporotic region between control group and experimental group, previous fracture-74% increase, parent fracture-96% increase, current smoking-2% increase, glucocorticoid-61% increase, rheumatoid arthritis-29% increase, alcohol-20% increase, secondary osteoporosis-0.18% decrease. The average rate of increment of hip region between control group and experimental group, previous fracture-84% increase, parent fracture-5% increase, current smoking-72% increase, glucocorticoid-84% increase, rheumatoid arthritis-40% increase, alcohol-52% increase, secondary osteoporosis-1.69% decrease. Conclusions: Each fracture risk factor has different rate of increment between major osteoporotic and hip region while in occasion of the second osteoporosis it has little relation because of low P-value. We could know that a contribution of the risk factor is different between major osteoporotic and hip region.

• Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
• /
• v.56 no.6
• /
• pp.491-497
• /
• 2021

Purpose: To investigate the prevalence of osteoporosis or osteopenia via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone mineral density (DEXA BMD) in adult males who showed radiolucent lumbar vertebra on the plain radiographs. Materials and Methods: The DEXA BMD values of 98 adult males, who showed radiolucent vertebrae on plain X-rays, were compared with those of the control group (n=168) and osteoporosis-related fracture group (n=113) by statistical analysis. The World Health Organization (WHO) method (lower value between the mean lumbar and femur neck) and the Hansen's method (lowest lumbar vertebra) were used to determine osteoporosis. Results: The mean and standard deviation of the BMD value of each group was -1.4 (±1.2) in the suspicious group, -0.8 (±1.1) in the control group, and -2.4 (±1.0) in the fracture group, respectively; the difference was statistically significant. Using the WHO method, the prevalence ratio of osteoporosis was 17.3% in the suspicious group, 8.3% in the control group, and 45.1% in the fracture group, respectively. Osteopenia was observed in 40.8% of the suspicious group. Hansen's method (lowest lumbar vertebra) revealed the prevalence of osteoporosis in 30.6% of the suspicious group, 17.9% of the control group, and 62.0% of the fracture group. Conclusion: Approximately 17.3% of the suspicious group was diagnosed with osteoporosis, and 40.8% were osteopenic by a confirmative BMD study (WHO criteria) among the adult males showing apparent radiolucency on plain X-rays. The control group also showed an 8% prevalence of osteoporosis. These results suggest that males also are vulnerable to osteoporosis. Therefore, a BMD study should also be used for males, especially for the people showing lumbar vertebrae with radiolucent features.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.15-22
• /
• 2009

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the effects on bone mineral density (BMD) and related factors according to the distance from the radiation field at different sites. This study was conducted on patients with uterine cervical cancer who received pelvic radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: We selected 96 patients with cervical cancer who underwent determination of BMD from November 2002 to December 2006 after pelvic radiotherapy at Kosin University Gospel Hospital. The T-score and Z-score for the first lumbar spine (L1), fourth lumbar spine (L4) and femur neck (F) were analyzed to determine the difference in BMD among the sites by the use of ANOVA and the post-hoc test. The study subjects were evaluated for age, body weight, body mass index (BMI), post-radiotherapy follow-up duration, intracavitary radiotherapy (ICR) and hormonal replacement therapy (HRT). Association between the characteristics of the study subjects and T-score for each site was evaluated by the use of Pearson's correlation and multiple regression analysis. Results: The average T-score for all ages was -1.94 for the L1, -0.42 for the L4 and -0.53 for the F. The average Z-score for all ages was -1.11 for the L1, -0.40 for the L4 and -0.48 for the F. The T-score and Z-score for the L4 and F were significantly different from the scores for the L1 (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the L4 and F. Results for patients younger than 60 years were the same as for all ages. Age and ICR were negatively correlated and body weight and HRT were positively correlated with the T-score for all sites (p<0.05). BMI was positively correlated with the T-score for the L4 and F (p<0.05). Based on the use of multiple regression analysis, age was negatively associated with the T-score for the L1 and F and was positively correlated for the L4 (p<0.05). Body weight was positively associated with the T-score for all sites (p<0.05). ICR was negatively associated with the T-score for the L1 (p<0.05). HRT was positively associated with the T-score for the L4 and F (p<0.05). Conclusion: The T-score and Z-score for the L4 and F were significantly higher than the scores for the L1, a finding in contrast to some previous studies on normal women. It was thought that radiation could partly influence BMD because of a higher T-score and Z-score for sites around the radiotherapy field. We suggest that a further long-term study is necessary to determine the clinical significance of these findings, which will influence the diagnosis of osteoporosis based on BMD in patients with cervical cancer who have received radiotherapy.