Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 

About: Journal of Bone and Mineral Research is an academic journal published by Wiley-Blackwell. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Osteoporosis & Bone remodeling. It has an ISSN identifier of 0884-0431. Over the lifetime, 9277 publications have been published receiving 746264 citations. The journal is also known as: JBMR.

Bone histomorphometry: Standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units: Report of the asbmr histomorphometry nomenclature committee

Abstract: RACTITIONERS OF BONE HISTOMORPHOMETRY communicate P with each other in a variety of arcane languages, which in general are unintelligible to those outside the field. Many in the bone and mineral scientific community would like to keep abreast of the contributions of histology to their subject, but are dismayed by the semantic barriers they must overcome. The need for standardization has been recognized for many years,(') during which there has been much talk but no action. To meet the needs of ASBMR members, Dr. B.L. Riggs (President, 19851986) asked the senior author to convene a committee of the Society to develop a unified system of termnology, suitable for adoption by the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research as part of its Instructions to Authors. The committee includes members from Europe and Canada as well as the U.S., and represents most existing systems of nomenclature. A circular letter seeking suggestions and information on current usage was sent to several hundred persons, with names drawn from the Society membership roster and lists of attendees at various recent conferences, to which approximately 40 replies were obtained. These confirmed the magnitude of the semantic problem (for some measurements as many as nine different terms were in use) and suggested a range of solutions likely to be generally acceptable. In formulating the new system. the committee kept in mind certain agreed general principles. First, the primary reason for change was to help other scientists understand bone histomorphometry, not to help bone histomorphometrists undcntand each other. Second. names should be self-explanatory and dcscriptive, without implicit assumptions. Third. symbols should consist mainly of abbreviations that included the first letter of each word in the same order as in the name. without subscripts or superscripts. Fourth. each symbol component should have one and only one meaning, and so eliminate ambiguity. Fifth, primary measurements should be clearly distinguished from derived indices. Finally, the chosen system should be sufficiently flexible to apply to all surfaces and all types of bone, and to accommodate any new primary measurement or derived index. The recommended system shares common elements with. but also differs substantially from. all those in current usc. was tested in practice for several months before the final forniat was chosen, and is as complex and conceptually difficult ;I\\ the field with which it deals. For those within the field we hope that increased readership of their papers will be adequate conipensation for the inconvcnicncc of learning a new systcm. For those outside the field, mastering the new system will be hard work, but if we are able to secure its acceptance by all journals with an interest in bone and mineral metabolism, the effort will only have to be expended once rather than. as at present. rcpeated many times. To this end we give the reasons for our decisions in the areas of controversy and, as well as definitions, provide methods for calculation of derived indices and

Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025.

Abstract: This study predicts the burden of incident osteoporosis-related fractures and costs in the United States, by sex, age group, race/ethnicity, and fracture type, from 2005 to 2025. Total fractures were >2 million, costing nearly $17 billion in 2005. Men account for >25% of the burden. Rapid growth in the disease burden is projected among nonwhite populations. Introduction: The aging of the U.S. population will likely lead to greater prevalence of osteoporosis. Policy makers require precise projections of the disease burden by demographic subgroups and skeletal sites to effectively target osteoporosis intervention and treatment programs. Materials and Methods: A state transition Markov decision model was used to estimate total incident fractures and costs by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and skeletal site for the U.S. population ≥50 years of age for 2005–2025. Results: More than 2 million incident fractures at a cost of $17 billion are predicted for 2005. Total costs including prevalent fractures are more than $19 billion. Men account for 29% of fractures and 25% of costs. Total incident fractures by skeletal site were vertebral (27%), wrist (19%), hip (14%), pelvic (7%), and other (33%). Total costs by fracture type were vertebral (6%), hip (72%), wrist (3%), pelvic (5%), and other (14%). By 2025, annual fractures and costs are projected to rise by almost 50%. The most rapid growth is estimated for people 65–74 years of age, with an increase >87%. An increase of nearly 175% is projected for Hispanic and other subpopulations. Conclusions: Osteoporosis prevention, treatment, and education efforts should address all skeletal sites, not just hip and vertebral, and appropriate attention is warranted for men and diverse race/ethnicity subgroups.

The diagnosis of osteoporosis

Abstract: VER THE YEARS many definitions of osteoporosis have been 0 offered to describe variously the outcome events (fragility fractures), the process giving rise to porous bones, or the resultant diminution of bone mass. More consistency has been achieved in recent years by the development of definitions that cover the spectrum of its manifestations. from the reduced amount of bone present to some of the consequences of bone loss. A consensus development conference statement defined osteoporosis as "a disease characterized by low bonc mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, leading to enhanced bone fragility and a consequent increase in fracture risk."'" The definition has survived the rigors of the most recent consensus development confcrence."' There are, however, a number of problems which need to be addressed in adapting a conceptual definition for clinical use. Some of these problems were recently discussed by an expert panel of the World Health Organization."' This paper summarizes these issues and proposes diagnostic criteria for osteoporosis for practical use.

Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro–computed tomography

Abstract: Use of high-resolution micro-computed tomography (microCT) imaging to assess trabecular and cortical bone morphology has grown immensely. There are several commercially available microCT systems, each with different approaches to image acquisition, evaluation, and reporting of outcomes. This lack of consistency makes it difficult to interpret reported results and to compare findings across different studies. This article addresses this critical need for standardized terminology and consistent reporting of parameters related to image acquisition and analysis, and key outcome assessments, particularly with respect to ex vivo analysis of rodent specimens. Thus the guidelines herein provide recommendations regarding (1) standardized terminology and units, (2) information to be included in describing the methods for a given experiment, and (3) a minimal set of outcome variables that should be reported. Whereas the specific research objective will determine the experimental design, these guidelines are intended to ensure accurate and consistent reporting of microCT-derived bone morphometry and density measurements. In particular, the methods section for papers that present microCT-based outcomes must include details of the following scan aspects: (1) image acquisition, including the scanning medium, X-ray tube potential, and voxel size, as well as clear descriptions of the size and location of the volume of interest and the method used to delineate trabecular and cortical bone regions, and (2) image processing, including the algorithms used for image filtration and the approach used for image segmentation. Morphometric analyses should be based on 3D algorithms that do not rely on assumptions about the underlying structure whenever possible. When reporting microCT results, the minimal set of variables that should be used to describe trabecular bone morphometry includes bone volume fraction and trabecular number, thickness, and separation. The minimal set of variables that should be used to describe cortical bone morphometry includes total cross-sectional area, cortical bone area, cortical bone area fraction, and cortical thickness. Other variables also may be appropriate depending on the research question and technical quality of the scan. Standard nomenclature, outlined in this article, should be followed for reporting of results.