9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Advances in imaging approaches to fracture risk evaluation

      , ,
      Translational Research
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="P2">Fragility fractures are a growing problem worldwide, and current methods for diagnosing osteoporosis do not always identify individuals who require treatment to prevent a fracture and may misidentify those not a risk. Traditionally, fracture risk is assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, which provides measurements of areal bone mineral density (BMD) at sites prone to fracture. Recent advances in imaging show promise in adding new information that could improve the prediction of fracture risk in the clinic. As reviewed herein, advances in quantitative computed tomography (QCT) predict hip and vertebral body strength; high resolution HR-peripheral QCT (HR-pQCT) and micro-magnetic resonance imaging (μMRI) assess the micro-architecture of trabecular bone; quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measures the modulus or tissue stiffness of cortical bone; and quantitative ultra-short echo time MRI methods quantify the concentrations of bound water and pore water in cortical bone, which reflect a variety of mechanical properties of bone. Each of these technologies provides unique characteristics of bone and may improve fracture risk diagnoses and reduce prevalence of fractures by helping to guide treatment decisions. </p>

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Translational Research
          Translational Research
          Elsevier BV
          19315244
          March 2017
          March 2017
          : 181
          : 1-14
          Article
          10.1016/j.trsl.2016.09.006
          5357194
          27816505
          f7c1542c-0653-4b72-bcf0-5081ea9dd8bd
          © 2017

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article