The prevention and treatment of osteoporosis: a review

Osteoporosis is a disorder characterized by reduced bone strength, diminished bone density, and altered macrogeometry and microscopic architecture. Adult bone mass is the integral measurement of the bone mass level achieved at the peak minus the rate and duration of subsequent bone loss. There is clearly a genetic predisposition to attained peak bone mass, which occurs by a person's mid-20s. Bone loss with age and menopause are universal, but rates vary among individuals. Both peak bone mass and subsequent bone loss can be modified by environmental factors, such as nutrition, physical activity, and concomitant diseases and medications. Osteoporosis prevention requires adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, regular physical activity, and avoiding smoking and excessive alcohol ingestion. Risk of fracture determines whether medication is also warranted. A previous vertebral or hip fracture is the most important predictor of fracture risk. Bone density is the best predictor of fracture risk for those without prior adult fractures. Age, weight, certain medications, and family history also help establish a person's risk for osteoporotic fractures. All women should have a bone density test by the age of 65 or younger (at the time of menopause) if risk factors are present. Guidelines for men are currently in development. Medications include both antiresorptive and anabolic types. Antiresorptive medications--estrogens, selective estrogen receptor modulators (raloxifene), bisphosphonates (alendronate, risedronate, and ibandronate) and calcitonins--work by reducing rates of bone remodeling. Teriparatide (parathyroid hormone) is the only anabolic agent currently approved for osteoporosis in the United States. It stimulates new bone formation, repairing architectural defects and improving bone density. All persons who have had osteoporotic vertebral or hip fractures and those with a bone mineral density diagnostic of osteoporosis should receive treatment. In those with a bone mineral density above the osteoporosis range, treatment may be indicated depending on the number and severity of other risk factors.     

Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry And Calculated Frax Risk Scores May Underestimate Osteoporotic Fracture Risk In Vitamin D-Deficient Veterans With Hiv Infection

Objective: We evaluated the utility of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) in assessing fracture risk in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and vitamin D deficiency.Methods: This was a retrospective study of HIV-infected patients with co-existing vitamin D deficiency at the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Bone mineral density (BMD) was assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), and the 10-year fracture risk was calculated by the FRAX algorithm. Two independent radiologists reviewed lateral chest radiographs for the presence of subclinical vertebral fractures.Results: We identified 232 patients with HIV and vitamin D deficiency. Overall, 15.5% of patients met diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis on DEXA, and 58% had low BMD (T-score between -1 and -2.5). The median risk of any major osteoporotic and hip fracture by FRAX score was 1.45 and 0.10%, respectively. Subclinical vertebral fractures were detected in 46.6% of patients. Compared to those without fractures, those with fractures had similar prevalence of osteoporosis (15.3% versus 15.7%; P>.999), low BMD (53.2% versus 59.3%; P = .419), and similar FRAX hip scores (0.10% versus 0.10%; P = .412). While the FRAX major score was lower in the nonfracture group versus fracture group (1.30% versus 1.60%; P = .025), this was not clinically significant.Conclusion: We found a high prevalence of subclinical vertebral fractures among vitamin D–deficient HIV patients; however, DEXA and FRAX failed to predict those with fractures. Our results suggest that traditional screening tools for fragility fractures may not be applicable to this high-risk patient population.Abbreviations:25(OH)D = 25-hydroxyvitamin DBMD = bone mineral densityBMI = body mass indexDEXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometryFRAX = Fracture Risk Assessment ToolHIV = human immunodeficiency virusIQR = interquartile rangePTH = parathyroid hormoneVA = Veterans AffairsWHO = World Health Organization     

Adding VFA to DXA Identifies Fracture Risk in a Way Not Duplicated by Other Measures

Objective: Published studies have demonstrated that adding vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) identifies more patients with increased fracture risk than DXA alone. But who needs VFA? This study attempts to determine if some test other than VFA could duplicate the additional information obtained by performing VFA on all first-time patients. This study looked at the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), height loss, age, documented back pain, and nonvertebral fragility fractures.Methods: VFA was performed on 1,259 (all) DXA patients at their first visit from March 2010 through September 2013. All DXA and VFA results were read by the same International Society for Clinical Densitometry–certified clinician.Results: By DXA alone, 44% were osteoporosis. Adding VFA increased clinical osteoporosis by 36% of the original total patients. Eighty-three “normal bone mineral density” patients were changed to clinical osteoporosis. FRAX identified 53% of the patients with diagnosis changes. Historical height loss was not reliable. Increasing age correlated only weakly with clinical osteoporosis.Conclusion: These are modest numbers from a nonacademic referral practice and may not be typical of other populations. Thirty-six percent of our patients were misclassified by DXA alone, with fragility fractures already taken into account for T-scores of -1.5 and lower. FRAX, height loss, age, back pain, and fragility fractures all failed to identify many of the patients identified by VFA. Seeing the lateral spine images obtained by VFA influenced patients and families. VFA on all first-time patients should be reconsidered.Abbreviations:BMD = bone mineral density; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; FRAX = Fracture Risk Assessment Tool; HL = height loss; ISCD = International Society for Clinical Densitometry; VF = vertebral fracture; VFA = vertebral fracture assessment     

Frax Prediction without BMD for Assessment of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk

ObjectiveTo compare Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) calculations with and without bone mineral density (BMD) in predicting the 10-year probability of hip and major osteoporotic fractures (MOF).MethodsA cross-sectional review of patients requiring screening for osteoporosis as part of their routine medical care was conducted. Postmenopausal women and men over 50 years of age who were never diagnosed with osteoporosis or treated with U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved agents for osteoporosis were included. Height, weight, FRAX questionnaire, femoral neck BMD, and T-score data were obtained. FRAX scores with BMD (FRAX/BMD) and without BMD (FRAX) were calculated. Subjects were separated on the basis of identical and different treatment recommendations. Fracture risk factors were compared between groups using simple Student’s t test analysis of numerical variables and Fisher’s exact test analysis of binary variables.ResultsOf 151 total subjects, 127 (84%) had identical fracture risk predictions with or without BMD included in the FRAX calculation. Thirty subjects met treatment criteria and 97 did not, but the FRAX prediction was the same with risk factors alone or with risk factors plus BMD. Age was the only risk factor that was significantly different between those with identical and different predictions (median age, 64.42 and 76.25 years, respectively; P<.001).ConclusionIn most cases, FRAX alone provides the same prediction as FRAX with BMD. Younger age is more indicative of an identical prediction. (Endocr Pract. 2013;19:780-784)     

New Treatment Modalities in Osteoporosis

ObjectiveTo describe recently discovered agents for the management of osteoporosis.MethodsA literature review (PubMed search) was conducted to identify agents at various stages of development for osteoporosis treatment. Agents under study or review for approval were included.ResultsIn menopause, bone remodeling is increased, and agents that suppress bone resorption can stabilize bone mass. In contrast, agents that target the osteoblast can increase bone formation and bone mass. Novel antiresorptive agents can target the formation or the activity of osteoclasts. They include denosumab, an antibody to receptor activated nuclear factor kB; new selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as bazedoxifene; and cathepsin K inhibitors, such as odanacatib. Src kinase inhibitors are in the early phases of development. Parathyroid hormone is the only approved anabolic agent for the treatment of osteoporosis. Novel anabolic therapies for osteoporosis may include the use of factors with anabolic properties for bone or the neutralization of growth factor antagonists. Recent discoveries have demonstrated that the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway has a central role in osteoblastic cell differentiation. Antibodies to Wnt antagonists, such as sclerostin, are under development as new therapeutic approaches for osteoporosis. Anabolic therapies have the potential to enhance bone mass, but their long-term safety must be proven.ConclusionsNew developments in the treatment of osteoporosis include novel antiresorptive and anabolic agents. Their success will depend on their long-term effectiveness and safety profile. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:855-863)     

Virtual Orthopedic-Rehabilitation-Metabolic Collaboration for Treating Osteoporotic HIP Fractures

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a virtual, closed-loop protocol that treated hip fracture patients without formal clinic visits.Methods: In this prospective cohort study, an intervention group of 85 hip fracture patients (33.6%) with vitamin D levels ≥65 nmol/L who received recommendations for osteoporosis treatment, was compared to a nonintervention group of 168 (66.4%), with vitamin D <65 nmol/L. Treatment included vitamin D loading in orthopedic and rehabilitation departments for patients from both groups, and virtual, osteoporosis treatment recommendations by Metabolic Clinic physicians to patients from the intervention group upon achieving a vitamin D level ≥65 nmol/L. Recommendations were given without requiring clinic visits. Osteoporosis drug recommendations were relayed to primary care physicians. The primary endpoint was patients receiving osteoporosis drugs within 12-months post-surgery. Secondary endpoints were patients issued drugs within 3- and 6-months post-surgery, and 1-year post-fracture mortality rates.Results: Among 253 hip fracture patients (81.3 ± 10.7 years-of-age, 68.8% women), the postintervention osteoporosis medication issue rate was higher than in the nonintervention group (48.2% versus 22.0%, respectively; P<.001). More intervention group patients received drugs 3 months (18.8% versus 2.9%; P<.001) and 6 months after surgery (40% versus 5.9%; P<.001). One-year mortality was lower among patients who received any osteoporosis medications (either through our intervention or from community physicians) than among untreated patients (5.1% versus 26.3%; P<.001).Conclusion: Virtual orthopedic-rehabilitation-metabolic collaboration increased osteoporosis treatment rates post-hip fracture. Yet, treatment rates remained <50%. Additional research is required to increase treatment rates further, such as providing drug therapy shortly after surgery, perhaps during rehabilitation, or lowering the vita-min D threshold.Abbreviations: CHS = Clalit Health Services; FLS = Fracture liaison service; HMO = Health Maintenance Organization; MMC = Meir Medical Center; PCP = primary care physician     

Orthopedic-Metabolic Collaborative Management for Osteoporotic Hip Fracture

Objective: Osteoporotic hip fractures are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and secondary fractures. Although osteoporosis treatment can reduce future fracture risk, patients often do not receive it. We report results of a coordinator-less fracture liaison service in Israel addressing hip fracture patients. The primary endpoint was attending the Metabolic Clinic. Secondary endpoints included vitamin D measurement, calcium and vitamin D recommendations, initiation of osteoporosis treatment, and mortality 1-year post-fracture.Methods: This prospective study included 219 hip fracture patients who were compared with historical controls. Data on hospitalized patients were collected before and after implementation of a structured protocol for hip fracture patients, led by a multidisciplinary team, without a coordinator.Results: The study included 219 and 218 patients ≥60 years old who were operated on in 2013 and 2012, respectively. Metabolic Clinic visits increased from 6.4 to 40.2% after the intervention (P<.001). Among 14 patients who attended the Clinic in 2012, 85.7% began osteoporosis therapy; among 88 who attended in 2013, 45.5% were treated at the first visit. Vitamin D measurements and calcium and vitamin D supplementation increased postintervention (0.5–80.1%, P<.001; 30.8–84.7%, P<.001, respectively). Patients receiving osteoporosis medications had lower mortality rates than untreated patients (4.3% vs. 21.8%).Conclusion: An Orthopedic-Metabolic team implemented by existing staff without a coordinator can improve osteoporosis care for hip fracture patients. Yet, gaps remain as only 40% had Metabolic Clinic follow-up postintervention, and of these, only half received specific treatment recommendations. Hospitals are encouraged to adopt secondary fracture prevention protocols and continuously improve them to close the gaps between current management and appropriate metabolic assessment and treatment.Abbreviations: CHS = Clalit Health Services; CI = confidence interval; FLS = fracture liaison service; HMO = health maintenance organization; OR = odds ratio     

Osteoporosis: the current status of mesenchymal stem cell-based therapy

Osteoporosis, or bone loss, is a progressive, systemic skeletal disease that affects millions of people worldwide. Osteoporosis is generally age related, and it is underdiagnosed because it remains asymptomatic for several years until the development of fractures that confine daily life activities, particularly in elderly people. Most patients with osteoporotic fractures become bedridden and are in a life-threatening state. The consequences of fracture can be devastating, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality of the patients. The normal physiologic process of bone remodeling involves a balance between bone resorption and bone formation during early adulthood. In osteoporosis, this process becomes imbalanced, resulting in gradual losses of bone mass and density due to enhanced bone resorption and/or inadequate bone formation. Several growth factors underlying age-related osteoporosis and their signaling pathways have been identified, such as osteoprotegerin (OPG)/receptor activator of nuclear factor B (RANK)/RANK ligand (RANKL), bone morphogenetic protein (BMP), wingless-type MMTV integration site family (Wnt) proteins and signaling through parathyroid hormone receptors. In addition, the pathogenesis of osteoporosis has been connected to genetics. The current treatment of osteoporosis predominantly consists of antiresorptive and anabolic agents; however, the serious adverse effects of using these drugs are of concern. Cell-based replacement therapy via the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) may become one of the strategies for osteoporosis treatment in the future.     

Osteoporosis Treatment After Osteoporotic Fractures: Data From a Single Medical Center

ObjectiveMost patients do not receive osteoporosis treatment after osteoporotic fracture. This study reviewed osteoporosis treatment after osteoporotic fractures in a center without a Fracture Liaison Service.MethodsWe identified all patients with hip, vertebral, humeral or radial fractures, evaluated in Meir Medical Center, in 2017. The exclusion criteria were not a Clalit Health Services member, high-energy fracture or 30-day postoperative mortality. The primary endpoint was osteoporosis drugs issued within 12 months of fracture. Secondary endpoints included bone densitometry and 1-year mortality.ResultsFive-hundred-eighty-two patients (average age 78.6 ± 11.1 years, 75.8% women) were included. There were 321 (55.5%) hip, 84 (14.1%) humeral, 33 (5.6%) vertebral, and 144 (24.7%) radial fractures. Osteoporosis drugs were issued to 26.5% of the patients; those with humeral fractures received the least (21.4%) and vertebral, the most (30.3%; P = .51). Bone densitometry was performed in 23.2% of patients. One-year mortality after hip fracture was 12.1%, followed by humeral (3.6%; P < .05). Logistic regression showed that previous treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 7.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6–15.2), bone densitometry (OR = 4.4; 95% CI 2.6–7.4) and endocrinology visit (OR = 2.6; 95% CI, 1.4–4.6) were the most important factors associated with treatment.ConclusionFewer than one third of patients received pharmacotherapy within 1 year after fracture. Because pharmacotherapy reduces future fractures and mortality, we recommend that medical staff who care for patients with fracture adopt practical and effective strategies to increase treatment rates among patients with osteoporotic fractures.     

Transient Osteoporosis: Clinical Spectrum in Adults and Associated Risk Factors

Objective: We aimed to describe the natural history of the rare clinical syndrome of transient osteoporosis (TO) and ascertain potential risk factors.Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adults with TO at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, over 15 years. Adults with acute-onset joint pain worsened by weight bearing and bone marrow edema on magnetic resonance imaging were included; exclusion criteria were trauma, tumors, rheumatic diseases, avascular necrosis, infection, and hyperesthesia.Results: Thirty-three patients with TO were identified: 20 males, median age at diagnosis 47 years, and median body mass index 28 kg/m². Median time to diagnosis was 2 months, and time to symptom resolution was 4 months. All cases involved the lower extremity, with the majority affecting the hip. Most patients (79%) had at least one possible identified risk factor. The most frequent risk factor was low bone mineral density (BMD) in 13 patients (39% of cohort). Of the 16 patients with BMD measure, 8 had low BMD at a site other than TO. The next most frequent risk factors were sudden limb overuse and more than one episode of TO, observed in 30%, followed by a disorder of bone and mineral metabolism in 27%.Conclusion: TO affects middle-age men more than women, primarily involves weight-bearing joints, and usually resolves with conservative management. Its etiology remains unclear; however, the common presence of risk factors, abnormalities in bone and mineral laboratories, and decrease in BMD suggest that systemic factors may be important in its development.Abbreviations: AVN = avascular necrosis; BMD = bone mineral density; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; TO = transient osteoporosis     

The Effects of Hyponatremia on Bone Density and Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: Hyponatremia decreases bone mineral density and is a major risk factor for fragility fractures. Objectives of our systematic review and meta-analysis were to analyze the overall effects of hyponatremia on bone fractures, osteoporosis, and mortality.Methods: We extracted data from Medline, Cochrane Central, and EMBASE 1960–2017 and conference abstracts from 2007–2017. We included studies with data on serum sodium, fractures, bone density, or diagnoses of osteoporosis. Studies were independently reviewed by two authors and assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Random effect models meta-analysis was used when at least three studies reported the same outcome measures. We reported summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: We included 26 studies for qualitative analysis. Fifteen studies were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of hyponatremia on fractures, four studies for bone mineral density changes, and six for mortality. Hyponatremia increased the odds of fractures at all sites (summary OR, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.86, 2.96]. There was an increase in the odds of osteoporosis (summary OR, 2.67 [95% CI, 2.07, 3.43]). Mortality risk among the included studies remained high (summary OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.16, 1.47]).Conclusion: Our meta-analysis confirms a statistically significant association of hyponatremia with bone fractures and osteoporosis along with higher mortality. Long-term prospective studies evaluating the impact of correcting hyponatremia on bone health, fractures, and mortality are required.Abbreviations: AVP = arginine vasopressin; CI = confidence interval; CKD = chronic kidney disease; OR = odds ratio; SIADH = syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone     

Effects of Bisphosphonates on Osteoporosis Induced by Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Prospective Study

Objective: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a severe X-linked progressive neuromuscular disease that brings a significantly increased risk of osteoporosis and bone fractures. We prospectively evaluated the effects of oral and intravenous bisphosphonates on the bones of children with DMD.Methods: This study included a total of 52 children with DMD. They were divided into zoledronic acid (ZOL), alendronate (ALN), and control groups according to bone mineral density (BMD) and history of fragility fractures. For 2 years, all patients took calcium, vitamin D, and calcitriol. Meanwhile, 17 patients received infusions of ZOL, and 18 patients received ALN. BMD, serum levels of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and the cross-linked C-telopeptide of type I collagen (β-CTX) were evaluated.Results: After 24 months of treatment, the percentage changes in lumbar spine BMD were 23.2 ± 9.7% and 23.6 ± 8.8% in the ZOL and ALN groups (all P<.01 vs. baseline). The increases did not differ between the ZOL and ALN groups, but were significantly larger than those of the control group (P<.01). Serum β-CTX and ALP levels, respectively, were decreased by 44.4 ± 18.0% and 31.9 ± 26.7% in the ZOL group and by 36.0 ± 20.3% and 25.8 ± 14.4% in the ALN group (all P<.01 vs. baseline).Conclusion: Zoledronic acid and alendronate had similar protective effects to increase bone mineral density and reduce bone resorption in children with DMD, which were superior to treatment of calcium, vitamin D, and calcitriol.Abbreviations: 25OHD = 25 hydroxyvitamin D; ALN = alendro-nate; ALP = alkaline phosphatase; ALT = alanine aminotransferase; BMD = bone mineral density; BP = bisphosphonate; Ca = calcium; β-CTX = cross-linked C-telopeptide of type I collagen; DMD = Duchenne muscular dystrophy; FN = femoral neck; GC = glucocorticoid; LS = lumbar spine; ZOL = zoledronic acid     

A review of anabolic therapies for osteoporosis

Osteoporosis results from a loss of bone mass and bone structure such that the bone becomes weak and fractures with very little trauma. Until recently, the approved osteoporosis therapies prevented more bone loss by altering osteoclast activity and lifespan. Recently, attention has turned away from osteoclast inhibition to agents that can stimulate the osteoblast to form new bone, or anabolic agents. This article reviews both approved and experimental anabolic agents that improve bone mass by improving osteoblast activity, or increasing osteoblast number. The use of the anabolic agents to improve bone mass and strength followed by agents that prevent the new bone mass from being lost may offer the ability to cure osteoporosis and reduce bone fracture healing time.     

Osteoporosis in Men

ObjectiveTo review information pertinent to bone health and osteoporosis in men.MethodsA review of pertinent literature was conducted.ResultsOsteoporosis affects approximately 2 million men in the US and accounts for an estimated 600,000 fractures each year. There are significant differences in skeletal size and structure between men and women that account for differences in fracture incidence, location, and outcomes. Bone density testing is appropriate for men age 70 and older and younger men (50-69) who have risk factors for osteoporosis. Lifestyle management, including adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, appropriate physical activity, and avoidance of tobacco and heavy alcohol use, is appropriate for all men. Pharmacologic therapy to reduce fracture risk is advisable for men with a clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis (a spine or hip fracture) or a T-score of −2.5 or below in the spine, femoral neck, total hip or 1/3 radius; however, the majority of men at high risk will only be identified using a fracture risk assessment tool, such as FRAX. Alendronate, risedronate, zoledronic acid, denosumab, and teriparatide are Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved therapeutic options.ConclusionOsteoporosis in men presents an important public health problem with significant morbidity and mortality. There are recommended strategies for identifying men at high risk of fracture, and effective agents are available for treatment. (Endocr Pract. 2013;19:834-838)     

Bone Mineral Density of the 1/3 Radius Refines Osteoporosis Diagnosis,Correlates With Prevalent Fractures,and Enhances Fracture Risk Estimates

ObjectiveTo investigate the added value of 1/3 radius (1/3R) for the diagnosis of osteoporosis by spine and hip sites and its correlation with prevalent fractures and predicted fracture risk.MethodsFracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores for hip and major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) with/without trabecular bone score were considered proxy for fracture risk. The contribution of 1/3R to risk prediction was depicted via linear regression models with FRAX score as the dependent variable—first only with central and then with radius T-score as an additional covariate. Significance of change in the explained variance was compared by F-test.ResultsThe study included 1453 patients, 86% women, aged 66 ± 10 years. A total of 32% (n = 471) were osteoporotic by spine/hip and 8% (n = 115) by radius only, constituting a 24.4% increase in the number of subjects defined as osteoporotic (n = 586, 40%). Prior fracture prevalence was similar among patients with osteoporosis by spine/hip (17.4%) and radius only (19.1%) (P = .77).FRAX prediction by a regression model using spine/hip T-score yielded explained variance of 51.8% and 49.9% for MOF and 39.8% and 36.4% for hip (with/without trabecular bone score adjustment, respectively). The contribution of 1/3R was statistically significant (P < .001) and slightly increased the explained variance to 52.3% and 50.4% for MOF and 40.9% and 37.4% for hip, respectively.ConclusionReclassification of BMD results according to radius measurements results in higher diagnostic output. Prior fractures were equally prevalent among patients with radius-only and classic-site osteoporosis. FRAX tool performance slightly improved by incorporating radius BMD. Whether this approach may lead to a better fracture prediction warrants further prospective evaluation.     

Prospect of mesenchymal stem cells in therapy of osteoporosis: A review

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease associated with reduced bone strong point that results in raised fracture risk, with decreased bone strength, leading to reduced bone mineral density and poor bone quality. It is the most common in older females but some men are also at high risk. Although considered as a predictable result of aging, it is can be avoidable and treatable. The existing treatment of osteoporosis mainly contains antiresorptive and anabolic agents. In spite of these improvements, concerns around unusual side-effects of antiresorptive drugs, and the lack of perfect confirmation in maintenance of their long-standing effectiveness is bring about many patients not receiving these drugs. Over the years, the stem cell-based therapy has attained substantial clinical consideration because of its potential to treat numerous diseases. The stem cell therapy has been recommended as a probable therapeutic approach for patients with osteoporosis. Even though the concept of stem cell-based therapy for osteoporosis has caught substantial attention, no clinical trial has been published on humans. The cell studies based on osteoporosis are primarily focused on osteoclastic activity and bone resorption procedures. Earlier, it was on osteoblastogenesis and in recent times, on the differentiation probable of mesenchymal stem cells. In this review, we have summarized the therapeutic role of stem cell-based strategy in osteoporosis.     

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis — 2016--Executive Summary

Abbreviations:AACE = American Association of Clinical EndocrinologistsAFF = atypical femur fractureASBMR = American Society for Bone and Mineral ResearchBEL = best evidence levelBMD = bone mineral densityBTM = bone turnover markerCBC = complete blood countCI = confidence intervalDXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometryEL = evidence levelFDA = U.S. Food and Drug AdministrationFLEX = Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT) Long-term ExtensionFRAX® = Fracture Risk Assessment ToolGFR = glomerular filtration rateGI = gastrointestinalHORIZON = Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once YearlyIOF = International Osteoporosis FoundationISCD = International Society for Clinical DensitometryIU = international unitsIV = intravenousLSC = least significant changeNBHA = National Bone Health AllianceNOF = National Osteoporosis Foundation25(OH)D = 25-hydroxy vitamin DONJ = osteonecrosis of the jawPINP = serum carboxy-terminal propeptide of type I collagenPTH = parathyroid hormoneR = recommendationRANK = receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-BRANKL = receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligandRCT = randomized controlled trialRR = relative riskS-CTX = serum C-terminal telopeptideSQ = subcutaneousVFA = vertebral fracture assessmentWHO = World Health Organization     

Management of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis or osteopenia occurs in about 44 million Americans, resulting in 1.5 million fragility fractures per year. The consequences of these fractures include pain, disability, depression, loss of independence, and increased mortality. The burden to the healthcare system, in terms of cost and resources, is tremendous, with an estimated direct annual USA healthcare expenditure of about $17 billion. With longer life expectancy and the aging of the baby-boomer generation, the number of men and women with osteoporosis or low bone density is expected to rise to over 61 million by 2020. Osteoporosis is a silent disease that causes no symptoms until a fracture occurs. Any fragility fracture greatly increases the risk of future fractures. Most patients with osteoporosis are not being diagnosed or treated. Even those with previous fractures, who are at extremely high risk of future fractures, are often not being treated. It is preferable to diagnose osteoporosis by bone density testing of high risk individuals before the first fracture occurs. If osteoporosis or low bone density is identified, evaluation for contributing factors should be considered. Patients on long-term glucocorticoid therapy are at especially high risk for developing osteoporosis, and may sustain fractures at a lower bone density than those not taking glucocorticoids. All patients should be counseled on the importance of regular weight-bearing exercise and adequate daily intake of calcium and vitamin D. Exposure to medications that cause drowsiness or hypotension should be minimized. Non-pharmacologic therapy to reduce the non-skeletal risk factors for fracture should be considered. These include fall prevention through balance training and muscle strengthening, removal of fall hazards at home, and wearing hip protectors if the risk of falling remains high. Pharmacologic therapy can stabilize or increase bone density in most patients, and reduce fracture risk by about 50%. By selecting high risk patients for bone density testing it is possible to diagnose this disease before the first fracture occurs, and initiate appropriate treatment to reduce the risk of future fractures.     

Radiologic Manifestation of Bone Involvement in Primary Hyperparathyroidism: Prevalence and Clinical Significance in a Southern European Series

Objective: Clinically overt symptomatic bone disease in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) is rarely seen today, and osteoporosis is the dominant finding. Subperiosteal bone resorption in the fingers and skull mottling are typical bone PHPT findings, the contemporary prevalence of which is unknown. We evaluated these mild lesions and investigated the impact of their occurrence on PHPT clinical management.Methods: We evaluated retrospectively a monocentric series of 363 PHPT patients classified in Group 1 (n = 100) or Group 2 (n = 263) according to the presence or absence of bone involvement, respectively. Patients belonging to Group 1, in turn, were subdivided into Group 1A, with severe and symptomatic lesions (n = 48), and Group 1B, with milder signs of osteitis fibrosa cystica (OFC) without brown tumors or fractures (n = 52).Results: Serum total and ionized calcium, parathyroid hormone, osteocalcin, alkaline phosphatase, and its bone fraction levels were higher in Group 1 than in Group 2, while no gender or age differences were observed between the groups. Osteoporosis prevalence was similar in Group 1B and Group 2 patients but lower than in Group 1A. Mild OFC findings did not modify the surgical indication in any patient of Group 1B.Conclusion: Minor radiologic signs of OFC are not uncommon in the modern PHPT phenotype and occur in patients with more active disease. These signs could identify PHPT patients in an earlier stage of typical bone involvement. However, these features do not seem to upgrade either the clinical classification of asymptomatic PHPT patients or the propensity toward surgical choice.     

Antiresorptive Agents Increase the Effects of Exercise on Preventing Postmenopausal Bone Loss in Women: A Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives

It remains unknown whether the combination of antiresorptive agents and exercise would generate additive effects on bone mineral density (BMD) in postmenopausal women, though their separate roles in preventing bone loss have been well established. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the combined impact of antiresorptive treatment and exercise on the lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD in postmenopausal women compared with an exercise-only intervention.

Methods

A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, SportDiscus and ProQuest up to Jun 2014 was conducted to identify the influence of antiresorptive agents and exercise on BMD in postmenopausal women. The study quality of the included trials was evaluated. The effect sizes were estimated by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD). Subgroup analyses were conducted by pharmacological regimens and exercise categories.

Results

Nine studies with a total of 1,248 postmenopausal women met the inclusion criteria. The heterogeneity between the studies was evident at the spine (I² = 78.7%) and hip (I² = 41.7%) measurements; random-effects models were used in the data analysis. The pooled effect sizes associated with the combined interventions of antiresorptive agents and exercise were significant at the lumbar spine BMD (SMD = 0.511, 95% CI = 0.118-0.904, p = 0.011). Combining hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and exercise training generated greater beneficial effects on lumbar spine (SMD = 0.729, 95% CI = 0.186-1.273, p = 0.009) and femoral neck BMD (SMD = 0.220, 95% CI = 0.0110-429, p = 0.039) than the exercise-only intervention. Impact exercise was sensitive to antiresorptive agents in preventing postmenopausal bone loss both at the spine (SMD = 1.252, 95%CI = 0.465-2.039, p = 0.002) and hips (SMD = 0.414, 95%CI = 0.106-0.723, p = 0.008).

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that antiresorptive agents significantly increase the impact of exercise on the prevention of bone loss in postmenopausal women, which implies that the combination of antiresorptive agents and exercise may generate additive effects.