PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Steven M Petak

Publications and source records attributed to Steven M Petak.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Official positions of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and Executive Summary of the 2005 Position Development Conference.

The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) convenes a Position Development Conference (PDC) every two years for the purpose of making recommendations on clinically relevant issues in bone densitometry. Topics for consideration are developed by the ISCD Scientific Advisory Committee and the PDC Steering Committee. Clinically relevant questions related to each topic area are assigned to subcommittees for a comprehensive medical literature review and presentation of a report to an international panel of experts. The expert panel includes representatives of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) and the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF). The recommendations of the PDC expert panel are evaluated by the ISCD Board of Directors, and those that are approved become Official Positions of the ISCD. The Official Positions have subsequently been endorsed by the ASBMR and IOF. The most recent PDC was held July 15-17, 2005, in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Topics considered included technical standardization, vertebral fracture assessment, and application of the 1994 World Health Organization (WHO) criteria to various skeletal sites and to populations other than postmenopausal white women. This report describes the methodology of the 2005 PDC and presents a summary of all ISCD Official Positions.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2006

Skeletal sites for osteoporosis diagnosis: the 2005 ISCD Official Positions.

The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) has developed Official Positions to assist healthcare providers in addressing some of the issues inherent with the use of bone mineral density (BMD) assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to diagnose osteoporosis, apply World Health Organization (WHO) T-score classifications, and monitor BMD changes over time. Differences exist, however, between the ISCD Official Position statement and that of the International Osteoporosis Foundation with respect to WHO criteria for skeletal sites. Consequently, a subcommittee of the ISCD was directed to address the application of the WHO classifications to specific skeletal sites and regions of interest. In 2005, the ISCD Position Development Conference reviewed the findings and prepared Official Positions, which address whether or not: (1) the lowest T-score of the total proximal femur, femoral neck, trochanter, and spine should continue to be used for diagnosis; (2) the WHO classification may be applied to a single vertebral body T-score; and (3) the ISCD should endorse the use of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database for proximal femur T-score derivation. The resulting ISCD Official Positions, with their corresponding rationales and evidence are provided here, as well as questions that will need to be addressed in the future.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2006

Standards for performing DXA in individuals with secondary causes of osteoporosis.

This document addresses skeletal health assessment in individuals with secondary causes of osteoporosis. Recommendations are based on consensus of the Canadian Panel of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and invited international experts. Bone mineral density (BMD) testing in these populations is performed in conjunction with careful evaluation of the disease state contributing to bone loss and increased fragility fracture risk, as well as assessment of other contributing risk factors for fracture. The presence of secondary causes of bone loss may further increase the risk of fracture independently of BMD and may necessitate earlier pharmacologic intervention. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is indicated in the initial workup of secondary causes of osteoporosis. The BMD fracture risk relationship is not known for individuals with chronic renal failure (CRF). The BMD testing in this population may be normal in the presence of skeletal fragility, and quantitative bone histomorphometry is better at evaluating skeletal status than BMD in CRF. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is a valuable tool in assessing skeletal health in individuals with secondary causes of osteoporosis.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2006

Position Development Conference of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Vancouver, BC, July 15-17, 2005.

Every 2 years the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) organizes a position development conference at which a panel of experts reviews topics of interest in the field of bone densitometry and proposes Official Positions of the ISCD. In July 2005, the most recent conference was held in Vancouver, Canada, during which 4 topics were discussed: (1) Cross-calibration of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) systems, (2) Vertebral fracture assessment, (3) World Health Organization (WHO) classification of bone density for populations other than postmenopausal women, and (4) WHO classification for varying skeletal sites. The Official Positions reached at this conference enumerated in this report have been published in The Journal of Clinical Densitometry, and can be found at www.iscd.org.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2004

Official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry.

The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) periodically holds Position Development Conferences for the purpose of establishing standards and guidelines for indications, acquisition, and interpretation of bone density tests. Topics are selected for consideration by the ISCD Scientific Advisory Committee, reviewed by scientific working groups, and presented to an international panel of experts. Topic categories addressed to date include indications for bone density testing, selection of reference databases for T-scores and Z-scores, clinical applications for central and peripheral bone densitometry, serial bone density testing, instrument precision assessment, phantom scanning and calibration testing, requirements for a bone density report, nomenclature, and diagnosis of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, premenopausal women, men, and children. After an open session for public comment and discussion, the panel convenes for consideration of each topic and makes recommendations for positions to the ISCD Board of Directors. Recommendations that are accepted become the Official Positions of the ISCD. This Special Report summarizes the methodology of the ISCD Position Development Conferences and presents selected Official Positions of general interest.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2004

Impact of using the ultradistal radius region of interest on diagnostic classification.

World Health Organization (WHO) criteria using T-scores for classifying patients as normal, osteopenic, or osteoporotic are based on bone mineral density (BMD, g/cm2) of the lumbar spine and hip and bone mineral content (BMC) (BMC, g) at the distal and midradius. There is no consensus on whether other forearm regions of interest (ROIs) can be used with the WHO criteria. Because the ultradistal radius region of interest (UDR) has a greater ratio of trabecular to cortical bone than midshaft portions of the radius, it is possible that more patients would be classified as osteoporotic if the UDR is measured. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of osteoporosis when using T-scores from the UDR in addition to PA lumbar spine, proximal femur (hip), and the radius 33% ROI. Retrospective data were obtained from three centers with differing patient demographics, thus reducing bias as a result of patient characteristics. Data were used only from patients who had a spine, hip, and forearm scan on the same day. Central dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) systems included a GE Lunar DPX-L, DPX IQ, and Prodigy and a Hologic Delphi. Hologic data were for the ultradistal radius + ulna ROI (UDRU). Diagnostic classification (using the WHO T-score criteria) was made excluding and including the UDR and UDRU T-scores, in addition to lumbar spine (L2-L4 or L1-L4), hip (femoral neck, greater trochanter, or total), and the radius 33% ROI. The lowest T-score from any ROI determined the classification. For all GE Lunar patients (n = 409 women; age range: 20-96 yr), the distribution of normal, osteopenic, osteoporotic not using the UDR was 94 (23%), 170 (42%), and 145 (36%), respectively. The distribution when using the UDR was 67 (16%), 137 (33%), and 205 (50%), respectively. The difference in the ratio of normal + osteopenic versus osteoporotic when excluding and including the UDR T-scores was significant (p < 0.0001; two-tailed Fisher's exact test). For all Hologic patients (n = 153 women; age range: 44-93 yr), the distributions were 32 (21%), 66 (43%), and 55 (36%) not using and 31 (20%), 64 (42%), and 58 (38%), respectively, using the UDRU (not statistically significantly different). The group mean T-scores were lowest for the UDR compared to the spine and hip with GE Lunar but not Hologic patients.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMed2002

Which central dual X-ray absorptiometry skeletal sites and regions of interest should be used to determine the diagnosis of osteoporosis?

Although central measurement of bone mass by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is viewed by many as the "gold standard" for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in patients without previous fragility fracture, controversy remains on how best to use central DXA as a tool for diagnosis. Questions concerning the measurement of bone mass of the central skeleton were addressed at the International Society for Clinical Densitometry Position Development Conference. An expert panel agreed on the following positions: First, the diagnosis of osteoporosis should be based on the lowest T-score of either the PA spine or hip. Second, both the PA spine and hip should be measured. Third, whenever possible, bone mineral density (BMD) of the first four lumbar vertebrae should be measured. Fourth, DXA manufacturers should use L1-L4 as the default region of interest for their printouts. Fifth, BMD of either hip may be measured. Sixth, the lowest T-score of the three sites total hip, femoral neck, or trochanter should be considered. Seventh, Ward's area should not be used for diagnostic purposes; DXA manufacturers should not include this region in the default printout. Eighth, BMD of the forearm should be measured if the hip or spine cannot be accurately measured. Finally, lateral spine BMD should not be used to diagnose osteoporosis.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMedDate not supplied

DXA quality matters.

The proliferation of devices to measure bone mineral density (BMD), with large numbers of technologists operating these instruments and numerous physicians interpreting/reporting the results, raises concern regarding the quality of the studies. High quality BMD measurement and reporting is essential, since referring healthcare providers rely on these reports to make patient care decisions that include additional medical evaluation (laboratory or imaging tests), drug therapy (starting, stopping, or changing), and possibly referral to an osteoporosis specialist. Incorrect BMD acquisition or reporting may generate unnecessary medical expenses and result in therapeutic decisions that could be harmful to patients. Contrary to the common misperception that BMD measurement and interpretation is a simple procedure requiring no special expertise, densitometer maintenance/operation, data acquisition, and interpretation/reporting of the results are skills that must be acquired and maintained. We recommend that technologists and clinicians involved with performing or interpreting BMD tests be educated and trained in bone densitometry and that they update their skills regularly. We also suggest that they provide demonstration of proficiency in bone densitometry in order to assure patients, referring healthcare providers, and payers of medical services that these skills have been acquired and maintained.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗
PubMedDate not supplied

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for clinical practice for the evaluation and treatment of hypogonadism in adult male patients--2002 update.

In these clinical practice guidelines, specific recommendations are made for determining the most effective methods of diagnosing and treating hypogonadism in adult male patients. The target populations for these guidelines include the following: (1) men with primary testicular failure requiring testosterone replacement (hypergonadotropic hypogonadism); (2) male patients with gonadotropin deficiency or dysfunction who may have received testosterone replacement therapy or treatment for infertility (hypogonadotropic hypogonadism); and (3) aging men with symptoms relating to testosterone deficiency who could benefit from testosterone replacement therapy. Initial hormonal evaluation generally consists of a testosterone determination, in conjunction with a free testosterone or sex hormone-binding globulin level, inpatients with clear symptoms and signs but normal-range total testosterone, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and prolactin levels. Other possible tests include semen analysis, pituitary imaging studies, genetic studies, bone densitometry, testicular ultrasonography,testicular biopsy, and specialized hormonal dynamic testing. Therapeutic options generally consist of testosterone replacement by injections, patches, or topically applied gel in hypergonadotropic patients and in hypogonadotropic patients not interested in fertility. In hypogonadotropic patients interested in fertility, gonadal stimulation option scan be considered, including human chorionic gonadotropin stimulation therapy with or without human menopausal gonadotropin (or follicle-stimulating hormone) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone pump therapy. These therapies may be combined with assisted reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilization with intracytoplasmic sperm injection, which may allow pregnancy to occur with very low numbers of sperm.

Adult↗