Clinical Indications for Bone Densitometry

  • Sydney Lou Bonnick
Part of the Current Clinical Practice book series (CCP)


There is no question that the variety of densitometry techniques available to the physician today can accurately and precisely quantify the bone density at virtually any skeletal site. But when should these technologies be used? In what clinical circumstances should physicians consider measuring the bone density? Four major organizations have published guidelines on the use of bone mass measurements. As practice guidelines, they are intended to help the physician determine when a bone mass measurement may be useful in the care of individual patients. A fifth major organization has published guidelines for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, based on the absolute level of the bone density or bone mass that is measured.


Bone Mass Fracture Risk Bone Density Proximal Femur Skeletal Site 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Johnston CC, Melton LJ, Lindsay R, Eddy DM (1989) Clinical indications for bone mass measurements. A report from the scientific advisory board of the National Osteoporosis Foundation. JBone Miner Res 4: S2.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miller PD, Bonnick SL, Rosen CJ (1996) Consensus of an international panel on the clinical utility of bone mass measurement in the detection of low bone mass in the adult population. Calcif Tissue Int 58: 207–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cummings SR, Black DM, Nevitt MC, Browner W, Cauley J, Ensrud K, et al. (1993) Bone density at various sites for the prediction of hip fractures. Lancet 341: 72–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Metlon LJ, Atkinson EJ, O’Fallon WM, Wahner HW, Riggs BL (1993) Long-term fracture prediction by bone mineral assessed at different skeletal sites. J Bone Miner Res 8: 1227–1233.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gardsell P, Johnell O, Nilsson BE, Gullberg B (1993) Predicting various fragility fractures in women by forearm bone densitometry: a follow-up study. Calcif Tissue Int 52: 348–353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hodgson SF, Johnston CC (1996) AACE clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Pract 2: 155–171.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanis J, Devogelaer J, Gennari C (1996) Practical guide for the use of bone mineral measurements in the assessment of treatment of osteoporosis: a position paper of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and Bone Disease. Osteoporosis Int 6: 256–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    World Health Organization (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. WHO Technical Report Series. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hui SL, Slemenda CW, Johnston CC (1989) Baseline measurement of bone mass predicts fracture in white women. Ann Intern Med 111: 355–361.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Drinka PJ, DeSmet AA, Bauwens SF, Rogot A (1992) The effect of overlying calcification on lumbar bone densitometry. Calcif Tissue Int 50: 507–510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frye MA, Melton LJ, Bryant SC, Fitzpatrick LA, Wahner HW, Schwartz RS, Riggs BL (1992) Osteoporosis and calcification of the aorta. Bone Miner 19: 185–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pouilles JM, Tremollieres F, Ribot C (1993) The effects of menopause on longitudinal bone loss from the spine. Calcif Tissue Int 52: 340–343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    He YF, Davis JW, Ross PD, Wasnich RD (1993) Declining bone loss rate variability with increasing follow-up time. Bone Miner 21: 119–128.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Riggs BL, Wahner HW, Melton LJ, Richelson LS, Judd HL, Offord KP (1986) Rates of bone loss in the appendicular and axial skeletons of women: evidence of substantial vertebral bone loss before menopause. J Clin Invest 77: 1487–1491.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mautalen C, Vega E, Ghiringhelli G, Fromm G (1990) Bone diminution of osteoporotic females at different skeletal sites. Calcif Tissue Int 46: 217–221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bonnick SL, Nichols DL, Sanborn CF, Lloyd K, Payne SG, Lewis L, Reed CA (1997) Dissimilar spinal and femoral z-scores in premenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 61: 263–265.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pouilles JM, Tremollieres F, Ribot C (1993) Spine and femur densitometry at the menopause: are both sites necessary in the assessment of the risk of osteoporosis? Calcif Tissue Int 52: 344–347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lai K, Rencken M, Drinkwater BL, Chesnut CH (1993) Site of bone density measurement may affect therapy decision. Calcif Tissue Int 53: 225–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Davis JW, Ross PD, Wasnich RD (1994) Evidence for both generalized and regional low bone mass among elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 9: 305–309.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Greenspan SL, Maitland-Ramsey L, Myers E (1996) Classification of osteoporosis in the elderly is dependent on site-specific analysis. Calcif Tissue Int 58: 409–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rupich RC, Griffin MG, Pacifici R, Avioli LV, Susman N (1992) Lateral dual-energy radiography: artifact error from rib and pelvic bone. J Bone Miner Res 7: 97–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mazess RB, Barden HS (1990) Interrelationships among bone densitometry sites in normal young women. Bone Miner 11: 347–356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sydney Lou Bonnick
    • 1
  1. 1.Texas Woman’s UniversityDentonUSA

Personalised recommendations