Diverging results of areal and volumetric bone mineral density in Down syndrome

Population with Down syndrome (DS) has lower areal BMD, in association with their smaller skeletal size. However, volumetric BMD and other indices of bone microarchitecture, such as trabecular bone score (TBS) and calcaneal ultrasound (QUS), were normal. INTRODUCTION: Patients with DS have a number of risk factors that could predispose them to osteoporosis. Several studies reported that people with DS also have lower areal bone mineral density, but differences in the skeletal size could bias the analysis. METHODS: Seventy-five patients with DS and 76 controls without intellectual disability were recruited. Controls were matched for age and sex. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measure by Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA), and volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) was calculated by published formulas. Body composition was also measured by DXA. Microarchitecture was measured by TBS and QUS. Serum 25-hidroxyvitamin D (25OHD), parathyroid hormone (PTH), aminoterminal propeptide of type collagen (P1NP), and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) were also determined. Physical activity was assessed by the International Physical Activity Questionnaires (IPAQ-short form). To evaluate nutritional intake, we recorded three consecutive days of food. RESULTS: DS individuals had lower height (151 ± 11 vs. 169 ± 9 cm). BMD was higher in the controls (lumbar spine (LS) 0.903 ± 0.124 g/cm2 in patients and 0.997 ± 0.115 g/cm2 in the controls; femoral neck (FN) 0.761 ± .126 g/cm2 and 0.838 ± 0.115 g/cm2, respectively). vBMD was similar in the DS group (LS 0.244 ± 0.124 g/cm3; FN 0.325 ± .0.073 g/cm3) and the controls (LS 0.255 ± 0.033 g/cm3; FN 0.309 ± 0.043 g/cm3). Microarchitecture measured by QUS was slightly better in DS, and TBS measures were similar in both groups. 25OHD, PTH, and CTX were similar in both groups. P1NP was higher in the DS group. Time spent on exercise was similar in both groups, but intensity was higher in the control group. Population with DS has correct nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Areal BMD is reduced in DS, but it seems to be related to the smaller body and skeletal size. In fact, the estimated volumetric BMD is similar in patients with DS and in control individuals. Furthermore, people with DS have normal bone microarchitecture

Discordant effect of body mass index on bone mineral density and speed of sound

BACKGROUND: Increased BMI may affect the determination of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and speed of sound (SOS) measured across bones. Preliminary data suggest that axial SOS is less affected by soft tissue. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on BMD and SOS measured along bones. METHODS: We compared axial BMD determined by DXA with SOS along the phalanx, radius and tibia in 22 overweight (BMI > 27 kg/m(2)), and 11 lean (BMI = 21 kg/m(2)) postmenopausal women. Serum bone specific alkaline phosphatase and urinary deoxypyridinoline excretion determined bone turnover. RESULTS: Mean femoral neck – but not lumbar spine BMD was higher in the overweight – as compared with the lean group (0.70 ± 0.82, -0.99 ± 0.52, P < 0.00001). Femoral neck BMD in the overweight – but not in the lean group highly correlated with BMI (R = 0.68. P < 0.0001). Mean SOS at all measurement sites was similar in both groups and did not correlate with BMI. Bone turnover was similar in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: The high BMI of postmenopausal women may result in spuriously high BMD. SOS measured along bones may be a more appropriate means for evaluating bones of overweight women

Pediatric DXA: technique and interpretation

This article reviews dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) technique and interpretation with emphasis on the considerations unique to pediatrics. Specifically, the use of DXA in children requires the radiologist to be a “clinical pathologist” monitoring the technical aspects of the DXA acquisition, a “statistician” knowledgeable in the concepts of Z-scores and least significant changes, and a “bone specialist” providing the referring clinician a meaningful context for the numeric result generated by DXA. The patient factors that most significantly influence bone mineral density are discussed and are reviewed with respect to available normative databases. The effects the growing skeleton has on the DXA result are also presented. Most important, the need for the radiologist to be actively involved in the technical and interpretive aspects of DXA is stressed. Finally, the diagnosis of osteoporosis should not be made on DXA results alone but should take into account other patient factors

Radiation and breast cancer: a review of current evidence

This paper summarizes current knowledge on ionizing radiation-associated breast cancer in the context of established breast cancer risk factors, the radiation dose–response relationship, and modifiers of dose response, taking into account epidemiological studies and animal experiments. Available epidemiological data support a linear dose–response relationship down to doses as low as about 100 mSv. However, the magnitude of risk per unit dose depends strongly on when radiation exposure occurs: exposure before the age of 20 years carries the greatest risk. Other characteristics that may influence the magnitude of dose-specific risk include attained age (that is, age at observation for risk), age at first full-term birth, parity, and possibly a history of benign breast disease, exposure to radiation while pregnant, and genetic factors