The usefulness of trabecular bone score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis

• Main Authors: Seoung Wan Nam, Yoon-Kyoung Sung, Dam Kim, Soo-Kyung Cho, Yoonah Song, Yun Young Choi, Yongjin Sim, Tae-Hwan Kim
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: The Korean Association of Internal Medicine 2021-09-01
• Series: The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine
• Subjects: bone; osteoporosis; ankylosing spondylitis
• Online Access: http://www.kjim.org/upload/pdf/kjim-2020-065.pdf

Backgrounds/Aims This study was performed to reveal the usefulness of the trabecular bone score (TBS) in assessing bone strength in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in comparison with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) methods. Methods A total of 215 AS patients (75.8% male) were enrolled from a single university hospital in Korea. Demographic and clinical information were assessed. Patients completed X-rays of the cervical and lumbar spine (L-spine), and spinal ankyloses were quantified using the modified Stoke AS Spine Score (mSASSS). Hip, anteroposterior and lateral L-spine bone mineral density (BMD) and TBS were assessed by DXA methods. Clinical characteristics and bone strength measurement results were compared between male and female AS patients. The accuracy of each bone strength evaluation method in predicting Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores indicating moderate or higher fracture risk was compared by receiver operating characteristic curves in patients aged ≥ 40 years. Correlations between each bone strength measurement method and mSASSS were examined. Results Male patients showed higher mSASSS and less prevalent peripheral joint involvement compared to female patients (p < 0.05). TBS, hip BMD, and L-spine lateral BMD showed comparably high areas under the curve (AUCs) for predicting FRAX-major osteoporotic fractures (MOF) ≥ 10% (AUC ranged 0.72 to 0.76). TBS negatively correlated with mSASSS in both male and female patients (p < 0.01). Conclusions TBS could predict the risk of MOF and is not influenced by spinal osteoproliferation in AS patients, even in those with advanced spinal changes.