Journals / Türk Osteoporoz Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2

Yaşlılarda Proksimal Femur Morfoloji ve Dokusunun Radyografik Değerlendirilmesi Yoluyla Osteoporozun Tahmini, Geçerli ve Güvenilir midir?

Prediction of Osteoporosis through Radiographic Assessment of Proximal Femoral Morphology and Texture in Elderly; is it Valid and Reliable?

Pages
46–52
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

All measured indices were significantly different (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the best predictive radiographic measurement method to identify the presence of osteoporosis and test the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability and validity of these methods in postmenopausal women.Materials and Methods: Ninety-two elderly female patients who presented with hip pain were included.
📊
Key Findings & Data:All measurements were performed by two independent observers on two separate occasions, at least 4 weeks apart.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All measured indices were significantly different (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the best predictive radiographic measurement method to identify the presence of osteoporosis and test the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability and validity of these methods in postmenopausal women.Materials and Methods: Ninety-two elderly female patients who presented with hip pain were included. Hip radiographs were used to determine the values of Singh index (SI), canal-to-calcar ratio (CCR), and cortical thickness index (CTI). All measurements were performed by two independent observers on two separate occasions, at least 4 weeks apart. Bone mineral density (BMD) was assessed by DEXA. In the first part of the analysis, reliability of the all measurement methods was tested. In the second part, correlation coefficient (Pearson r) was used to determine the relationship between the measurement methods and BMD. Finally ROC curve analysis was performed to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and threshold values for each radiographic measurement method.Results: Intra-observer reliability analysis of SI revealed kappa coefficient of 0.359 for observer A, and 0.224 for observer B. Inter-observer reliability analysis of SI revealed kappa coefficient of 0.070 for observer A and 0.051 for observer B. The intra-observer and inter-observer reliability was good and excellent for CTI and CCR for both observers (ICC: 0.920 and ICC: 0.936). There was no correlation between SI and BMD (p=0.818). On the other hand, there was a significant correlation between CTI and CCR and BMD (p=0.001). All measured indices were significantly different (p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, postmenepozal kadınlarda osteoporoz varlığını kalça grafilerinden belirleyecek en iyi radyografik ölçüm metodunu belirlemek ve bu yöntemlerin geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini araştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Kalça ağrısıyla hastaneye başvuran 92 postmenepozal kadın hasta çalışmaya alındı. Kalça radyografileri değerlendirilerek Singh indeks (Sİ), kanal kalkar oranı (KKO) ve Kortikal kalınlık indeksi (KKİ) ölçüldü. Tüm ölçümler en az 4 hafta arayla iki bağımsız gözlemci tarafından iki kez gerçekleştirildi. Hastaların kemik mineral yoğunluğu (KMY) DEXA ile değerlendirildi. Analizin ilk kısmında tüm ölçüm yöntemlerinin güvenilirliği test edildi. İkinci kısımda KMY ile ölçüm yöntemleri arasındaki ilgileşim analiz edildi, ilgileşim katsayısı (Pearson r) kullanıldı. En sonunda her bir radyografik ölçüm metotlarının sensivite, spesifitesini ve eşik değerini belirlemek için ROC eğri analizi yapıldı.Bulgular: Sİ'nin gözlemciler içi güvenilirlik analizi gözlemci A için kappa katsayısını 0,359, gözlemci B için 0,224 olarak bulundu. Sİ, gözlemciler arası güvenilirlik analizi gözlemci A için kappa katsayısını 0,070, gözlemci B için 0,051 olarak bulundu. Gözlemciler içi ve gözlemciler arası güvenilirlik KKO ve KKİ için iyi ve mükemmeldi (ICC: 0,920 ve ICC: 0,936). Sİ ve KMY ölçümleri arasında ilgileşim bulunamadı (p=0,818). Diğer yandan KKO, KKİ ve KMY ölçümleri arasında anlamlı bir ilgileşim saptandı (p=0,001). Osteoporotik ve nonosteopotik hastalar arasında ölçülmüş tüm indeksler anlamlı derecede farklıydı (p

🔖

Cite This Article

KILIÇASLAN, Ö. F., UÇAR, M., ARIK, H. O., TOSLAK, İ. E., KÖSE, Ö., SARP, Ü. (2022). Yaşlılarda Proksimal Femur Morfoloji ve Dokusunun Radyografik Değerlendirilmesi Yoluyla Osteoporozun Tahmini, Geçerli ve Güvenilir midir?. Türk Osteoporoz Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2, 46–52. https://ajindex.com/articles/639811

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Wade SW, Strader C, Fitzpatrick LA, Anthony MS, O'Malley CD. Estimating prevalence of osteoporosis: examples from industrialized countries. Arch Osteoporos 2014;9:182. Akan K, Cift H, Ozkan K, Eceviz E, Tasyikan L, Eren A. Effect of osteoporosis on clinical outcomes in intertrochanteric hip fractures treated with a proximal femoral nail. J Int Med Res 2011;39:857-65. Cornell CN: Internal fracture fixation in patients with osteoporosis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2003;11:109-19.
  2. Schipper IB, Steyerberg EW, Castelein RM, van der Heijden FH, den Hoed PT, Kerver AJ, et al. Treatment of unstable trochanteric fractures. Randomised comparison of the gamma nail and the proximal femoral nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004;86:86-94.
  3. Kim WY, Han CH, Park JI, Kim JY. Failure of intertrochanteric fracture fixation with a dynamic hip screw in relation to pre-operative fracture stability and osteoporosis. Int Orthop 2001;25:360-2.
  4. Kim SS, Lee MJ, Kim HJ, Kang JM. Comparison of femoral morphology and bone mineral density between femoral neck fractures and trochanteric fractures in 65+ females. Hip Pelvis 2012;24:102-8.
  5. Maeda Y, Sugano N, Saito M, Yonenobu K. Comparison of femoral morphology and bone mineral density between femoral neck fractures and trochanteric fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:884-9.
  6. Kanis JA, Gluer CC. An update on the diagnosis and assessment of osteoporosis with densitometry. Committee of Scientific Advisors, International Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporos Int 2000;11:192-202.
  7. Pramudito JT, Soegijoko S, Mengko TR, Muchtadi FI, Wachjudi RG. Trabecular Pattern Analysis of Proximal Femure Radiographs for Osteoporosis Detection, Journal of Biomedical & Pharmaceutical Engineering 2007;1:45-51.
  8. Singh M, Nagrath AR and Maini PS. Change in trabecular pattern of the upper end of the femur as an index to osteoporosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1970;52:457-67. Dorr LD. Total hip replacement using APR system. Tech Orthop 1986;1:22-34.
  9. Dorr LD, Gaugere MC, Mackel AM, Gruen TA, Bognar B, Malluche HH. Structural and cellular assessment of bone quality of proximal femur. Bone 1993;14:231-42.
  10. Rosson JW, Surowiak J, Schatzker J, Hearn T. Radiographic appearance and structural properties of proximal femoral bone in total hip arthroplasty patients J Arthroplasty 1996;11:180-3.
  11. Koot VC, Kesselaer SM, Clevers GJ, de Hooge P, Weits T, van der Werken C. Evaluation of the Singh index for measuring osteoporosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:831-4.
  12. Sah AP, Thornhill TS, Leboff MS,