The effect of peritoneal dialysate on DXA bone densitometry results in patients with end-stage renal disease

Ten tips on how to assess bone health in patients with chronic kidney disease

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) experience a several-fold increased risk of fracture. Despite the high incidence and the associated excess morbidity and premature mortality, bone fragility in CKD, or CKD-associated osteoporosis, remains a blind spot in nephrology with an immense treatment gap. Defining the bone phenotype is a prerequisite for the appropriate therapy of CKD-associated osteoporosis at the patient level. In the present review, we suggest 10 practical 'tips and tricks' for the assessment of bone health in patients with CKD. We describe the clinical, biochemical, and radiological evaluation of bone health, alongside the benefits and limitations of the available diagnostics. A bone biopsy, the gold standard for diagnosing renal bone disease, is invasive and not widely available; although useful in complex cases, we do not consider it an essential component of bone assessment in patients with CKD-associated osteoporosis. Furthermore, we advocate for the deployment of multidisciplinary expert teams at local, national, and potentially international level. Finally, we address the knowledge gaps in the diagnosis, particularly early detection, appropriate "real-time" monitoring of bone health in this highly vulnerable population, and emerging diagnostic tools, currently primarily used in research, that may be on the horizon of clinical practice.

Predictive Power of Bone Turnover Biomarkers to Estimate Bone Mineral Density after Kidney Transplantation with or without Denosumab: A post hoc Analysis of the POSTOP Study

BACKGROUND

Low bone mineral density (BMD) represents a major risk factor for bone fractures in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) as well as after kidney transplantation. However, modalities to solidly predict patients at fracture risk are yet to be defined. Better understanding of bone turnover biomarkers (BTMs) may close this diagnostic gap. This study strives to correlate BTMs to BMD in kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

Changes in BTMs - procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (P1NP), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP), β-isomer of the C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen, and urine deoxypyridinoline/Cr - at the time of transplant and 3 months were correlated to changes in BMD measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the time of transplant, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Half of the collective was treated with denosumab twice yearly in addition to the standard treatment with calcium and vitamin D.

RESULTS

Changes in bone formation markers BSAP and P1NP within 3 months showed a significant negative correlation to changes in BMD at the hip within 6 months in denosumab-naïve patients. This correlation was abrogated by denosumab treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in BSAP and P1NP showed promise in short-term prediction of BMD. We suggest further trials expanding on the knowledge of these BTMs with assessment of fracture risk, sequential measurements of BTMs within the first 6 months, and the additional use of computed tomography to assess BMD.

Bone Mineral Densitometry Reporting: Pearls and Pitfalls

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the method of choice for assessing bone mineral density (BMD). Unfortunately, the performance and interpretation of DXA can be challenging and errors are common. In fact, it has been reported that up to 90% of BMD reports contain at least 1 error. Errors can be the result of technique or interpretative in nature or both and can result in inappropriate diagnosis and management. In this article, we review the various types of pitfalls frequently encountered by physicians interpreting DXA studies. Being aware of these pitfalls will help readers recognize and avoid them when encountered in clinical practice.

Quality in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for measuring bone mineral density (BMD), making the diagnosis of osteoporosis, and for monitoring changes in BMD over time. DXA data are also used in the determination of fracture risk. Procedural steps in DXA scanning can be broken down into scan acquisition, analysis, interpretation, and reporting. Careful attention to quality control pertaining to these procedural steps should theoretically be beneficial in patient management. Inattention to procedural steps and errors that may occur at each step has the possibility of providing information that would inform inappropriate clinical decisions, generating unnecessary healthcare expenses and ultimately causing avoidable harm to patients. This article reviews errors in DXA scanning that affect trueness and precision related to the machine, the patient, and the technologist and reviews articles which document problems with DXA quality in clinical and research settings. An understanding of DXA errors is critical for DXA quality; programs such as certification of DXA technologists and interpreters help in assuring quality bone densitometry. As DXA errors are common, pay for performance requiring DXA technologists and interpreters to be certified and follow quality indicators is indicated.

Bone turnover markers are associated with bone density, but not with fracture in end stage kidney disease: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Fracture risk is increased in chronic kidney disease (CKD), but assessment of bone fragility remains controversial in these patients. This study investigated the associations between bone turnover markers, bone mineral density (BMD), and prevalent fragility fracture in a cohort of kidney transplantation candidates.

METHODS

Volumetric BMD of spine and hip was measured by quantitative computed tomography. Parathyroid hormone (PTH), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, procollagen type-1 N-terminal propeptide, tartrate resistant alkaline phosphatase, and C- and N-terminal telopeptides of type 1 collagen were analyzed from fasting morning blood samples. Fragility fractures included prevalent vertebral fractures and previous low-trauma clinical fractures.

RESULTS

The fracture prevalence was 18% in 157 adult kidney transplant candidates. Fractured patients had reduced BMD and Z-score at both spine and hip. Levels of bone turnover markers were significantly higher in patients on maintenance dialysis than in pre-dialysis patients; but did not differ between patients with and without fracture. There were strong, positive correlations between PTH and all bone turnover markers. PTH was negatively associated with Z-score at lumbar spine and total hip; in contrast, bone turnover markers were only negatively associated with total hip Z-score.

CONCLUSIONS

Bone turnover markers were negatively associated with bone density, but not associated with prevalent fracture in kidney transplantation candidates. The role of bone turnover markers in assessing bone fragility in CKD will require further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with identifier NCT01344434 .

Effect of Intravenous Contrast on Volumetric Bone Mineral Density in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) can be measured from clinical computed tomography (CT) scans, facilitating screening for osteoporosis. However, use of X-ray contrast media may influence vBMD analyses, and previous studies reported as much as a 30% increase in lumbar spine (LS) vBMD after contrast administration. At the total hip (TH), an increase of only 4.1% was reported, indicating less sensitivity to contrast enhancement at this site. This study aimed to investigate the changes in vBMD after intravenous contrast media administration at both the LS and proximal femur in patients with chronic kidney disease. Seventy-one patients underwent CT angiography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis as part of the cardiac workup before kidney transplantation. vBMD of the LS and proximal femur were calculated before and after administration of 95 mL ioversol intravenously. XY- and Bland-Altman plots and paired Student's t-test were used to evaluate changes in vBMD. After contrast media administration vBMD increased both at the LS and proximal femur. Although the absolute difference was comparable, the relative difference was almost twice as high at the LS (10.2% [6.1-14.1]) compared to the TH (5.9% [2.4-9.3], p <0.001) and femoral neck (FN) (5.3% [0.5-9.9], p <0.001). Women had a greater increase in LS-vBMD than men (13.4 ± 8.0 vs 9.8 ± 4.8 mg/cc, p = 0.02). Based on FN T-scores, 11 patients (16%) changed osteoporotic status after contrast enhancement. In conclusion vBMD of the spine and hip increased after contrast media administration in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease. FN T-scores from contrast-enhanced clinical CT scans should therefore be interpreted with caution. The proximal femur may be the preferred region for vBMD analysis from clinical CT scans, as sensitivity to contrast enhancement seem less at this site. These results may not be applicable to other patient populations.

The influence of exogenous fat and water on lumbar spine bone mineral density in healthy volunteers

PURPOSE

Changes in human body composition can affect the accuracy of spine bone mineral density (BMD) measurements. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether fat and water in the soft tissue of the abdomen influence lumbar spine BMD measurements obtained using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Duplicate BMD measurements were carried out on healthy volunteers (10 men and 10 women) and the Hologic anthropomorphic spine phantom had on the same day before and after placement of following 3 materials in the abdominal area: lard 900 g, 1.5 cm thick; oil 1.4 liters in a vinyl bag; and water 1.2 liters in a vinyl bag.

RESULTS

In the case of human participants, following the placement of exogenous water to mimic extracellular fluid (ECF), there was a significant decrease in lumbar spine BMD (-0.012 g/cm², p=0.006), whereas the placement of exogenous lard and oil to mimic abdominal fat produced a slight increase in lumbar spine BMD (0.006 g/cm², p=0.301; 0.008 g/cm², p=0.250, respectively). The average percentage of lumbar spine BMD change with and without exogenous lard, oil, and water showed increase of 0.51%, and 0.67%, and decrease of 1.02%, respectively. Using the phantom, BMD decreased with the placement of both lard (-0.002 g/cm², p=0.699) and water (-0.006 g/cm², p=0.153); however, there was no difference in BMD after oil placement.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that in cases where changes in fat and ECF volume are similar, ECF exerts a greater influence than fat on DXA lumbar BMD measurements.