Analysis of Age Distribution of Bone Mineral Density by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry

Objective: to conduct the study of age distribution of bone mineral density (BMD) by the database of dualenergy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and to compare it with datа of population NHANES study.
Material and methods. We used data from the densitometry of three-zone (total hip (TH), femoral neck (FN), and lumbar spine) measured by DXA from two outpatient clinics. The obtained data were compared with NHANES III for TH and FN and with NHANES 2005-08 for lumbar spine. The BMD value was corrected with the calibration coefficient for each DXA scanner. Adjustments were also made for the population distribution by sex and age.
Results. Compared with NHANES for FN and TH, the obtained BMD values were significantly decreased for patients aged less than 50 years (men and women). The BMD values for FN and TH were unsignificantly decreased in men older 50 years. In women older 50 years unsignificantly decreased BMD values for FN and a significantly increased BMD values for TH were observed. The BMD values were decreased for lumbar spine in men and women throughout this age interval (more than 50 years old).
Conclusion. The population BMD distribution in men and women was assessed by DXA method. The obtained dependence of the BMD for FN in women older 50 years was in good agreement with the results given by Russian and foreign authors.

1. Petraikin AV, Artyukova ZR., Nisovtsova LA, et al. Analysis of the effectiveness of implementing screening of osteoporosis. Manager zdravoohranenia. 2021; 2: 31–9 (in Russ.). http://doi.org/10.21045/1811-0185-2021-2-31-39.

2. Lesnyak O, Ershova O, Belova K, et al. Epidemiology of fracture in the Russian Federation and the development of a FRAX model. Arch Osteoporos. 2012; 7: 67–73. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-012-0082-3.

3. Belaya ZE, Rozhinskaya LY, Grebennikova TA, et al. Summary of the draft federal clinical guidelines for osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2020; 23(2): 4–21 (in Russ.). http://doi.org/10.14341/osteo12710.

4. Belaya ZE, Belova KYu, Biryukova EV, et al. Federal clinical guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of osteoporosis. Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. 2021; 24(2): 4–47 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.14341/osteo12930.

5. Benevolenskaya LI (Ed.) Guide to osteoporosis. Мoscow: BINOM Laboratoriya znaniy; 2003: 523 pp. (in Russ.).

6. Binkley N, Kiebzak GM, Lewiecki EM, et al. Recalculation of the NHANES database SD improves T-score agreement and reduces osteoporosis prevalence. J Bone Miner Res. 2005; 20(2): 195–201. http://doi.org/10.1359/JBMR.041115.

7. NHANES III (1988–1994). Available at: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/nhanes3/default.aspx (accessed November 20, 2022).

8. Namwongprom S, Ekmahachai M, Vilasdechanon N, et al. Bone mineral density: correlation between the lumbar spine, proximal femur and Radius in northern Thai women. J Med Assoc Thai. 2011; 94(6): 725–31.

9. Shatrugna V, Kulkarni B, Kumar PA, et al. Bone status of Indian women from a low-income group and its relationship to the nutritional status. Osteoporos Int. 2005; 16(12): 1827–35. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-005-1933-1.

10. Lesnyak OM, Baranova IA, Belova KY, et al. Osteoporosis in Russian Federation: epidemiology, socio-medical and economical aspects (review). Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2018; 24(1): 155–68 (in Russ.). http://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-1-155-168.

11. Petraikin AV, Smoliarchuk МJ, Petryaykin FA, et al. Assessment the accuracy of densitometry measurements using DMa PP2 phantom. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2019; 25(3): 124–34 (in Russ.). http://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-3-124-134.

12. Wilson KE. Practical considerations when replacing a DXA system. Available at: https://hologiced.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Wilson-KE.-Practical-Considerations-WhenReplacing-a-DXA-System.pdf (accessed November 20, 2022).

13. Genant HK, Grampp S, Glüer CC, et al. Universal standardization for dual X-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom crosscalibration results. J Bone Miner Res. 1994; 9(10): 1503–14. http://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650091002.

14. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Indications for bone mineral density (BMD) testing. Available at: https://iscd.org/learn/official-positions/adult-positions/ (accessed November 20, 2022).

15. Looker AC, Melton III LJ, Borrud LG, Shepherd JA. Lumbar spine bone mineral density in US adults: demographic patterns and relationship with femur neck skeletal status. Osteoporos Int. 2012; 23(4); 1351–60. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-011-1693-z.

16. Pedrazzoni M, Girasole G, Bertoldo F, et al. Definition of a population-specific DXA reference standard in Italian women: the Densitometric Italian Normative Study (DINS). Osteoporos Int. 2003; 14(12): 978–82. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-003-1521-1.

17. Tenenhouse A, Joseph L, Kreiger N, et al. Estimation of the prevalence of low bone density in Canadian women and men using a population-specific DXA reference standard: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos). Osteoporos Int. 2000; 11(10): 897–904. http://doi.org/10.1007/s001980070050.

18. Curiel MD, Carrasco de la Peña JL, Perez JH, et al. Study of bone mineral density in lumbar spine and femoral neck in a Spanish population. Osteoporosis Int. 1997; 7: 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01623462.

19. Shelepa AA, Petraikin AV, Artyukova ZR, et al. Artificial intelligence for bone mineral density assessment general population data. Digital Diagnostics. 2022; 3(S1): 23–4 (in Russ.). http://doi.org/10.17816/DD105714.