Affiliation:
1. North West State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov; City Clinical Rheumatological Hospital N 25, St. Petersburg
2. Ural State Medical University
3. City Clinical Rheumatological Hospital N 25, St. Petersburg
4. North West State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov; City Clinical Rheumatological Hospital N 25
Abstract
Background: The growing frequency of fractures associated with osteoporosis, the significant costs of their treatment, disability and increased mortality make it an important and urgent task to optimize the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis in the Russian Federation.Aim: The aim of this study was analyzed of using modern diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis by specialists when they making a clinical decision to initiate treatment for osteoporosis, including an estimate of the 10-year probability of fractures according to FRAX.Materials and methods: The study was conducted in the city consultative and diagnostic center for the prevention of osteoporosis, St. Petersburg. The register of the osteoporosis center for 2018–2021 was used to select patients for the study. Based on the analysis of registry data, a sample of 362 patients with newly diagnosed osteoporosis was obtained. In the resulting sample, the existing FRAX value was assessed on the therapeutic intervention threshold graph, all of them analyzed the primary medical documentation, as well as the available DXA densitometry data.Results: In this study, we assessed the place of FRAX 10-year risk of major osteoporotic fractures in the clinical decision of an osteoporosis specialist to start anti-osteoporosis therapy, in this case taken as the «gold standard». The study found that a positive FRAX score had a high predictive value of 100%. In contrast, the negative predictive value was very low (19.5%): a FRAX value below the intervention threshold did not guarantee a truly low fracture risk and no need to start osteoporosis treatment.Conclusion: Despite the fact that both densitometry and FRAX have significant limitations in use, and cannot identify all patients with a high risk of fractures, their combined use increases the prognostic value of the methods. FRAX technology in routine practice allows, in addition to clinical and instrumental methods for diagnosing high-risk fractures, to identify candidates for the treatment of osteoporosis, and should be used in accordance with clinical recommendations.
Publisher
Endocrinology Research Centre
Reference36 articles.
1. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1994;843:1-129
2. Lesnyak OM, Baranova IA, Belova KYu, et al. Osteoporosis in Russian Federation: Epidemiology, Socio-Medical and Economical Aspects (Review). Traumatol Orthop Russ.. 2018;24(1):155-168 (in Russ.). doi: https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-1-155-168
3. Disclosure rubricator. [Internet]. Osteoporosis. Clinical guidelines. (In Russ.). Доступно по: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/recomend/87_4 (ссылка активна на 29.01.2022).
4. Kanis JA, Melton LJ, Christiansen C, et al. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2009;9(8):1137-1141. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650090802
5. Kanis JA, Hans D, Cooper C, et al. Interpretation and use of FRAX in clinical practice. Osteoporos Int. 2011;22(9):2395-2411. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1713-z