Background The measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the current “gold standard” for diagnosing and monitoring osteoporosis, any errors in demographic information, improper patient positioning, incorrect scan analysis or interpretation can lead to erroneous results and decisions [1]. Moreover, a common condition represented by osteoarthritis, by modifying the joint soft tissues composition, can alter the values of BMD [2].

In patients affected by discarthrosis, in fact, osteoporotic T-score values at femoral neck (FN) can be associated with normal or osteopenic T-score values of the lumbar spine (LS), the latter influenced by the presence of osteophytes and/or subchondral bone sclerosis.

Objectives: To evaluate the predictive value of an innoative densitometric technique, the Radiofrequency Echographic Multi Spectrometry (REMS) [3], in detecting bone fragility in patients affected by osteoarthitis.

Methods: The T-score values of 35 postmenopausal women with clinical and/or radiological signs of osteoarthritis (mean age 71 years, average BMI 24,2) obtained by DXA at lumbar spine and femoral neck were compared with those obtained by REMS technique performed in the same anatomical sites.

Results: In all the subjects, LS T-score resulted significantly higher than the FN one according to DXA measurement. However, REMS outcomes in both the sites were significantly lower than the corresponding DXA measurement (significant difference between DXA and REMS T-score for both LS (p = 0.006) and FN (p = 0.010), and spinal REMS T-scores resulted more similar to femural REMS (average REMS T-score LS: -2.6 ± 1,6 vs T-score FN: -2.4 ± 0, 6) and to femural DXA values.

Conclusion: These preliminary data suggest that REMS technique, which has been shown to have high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy when compared with DXA in diagnosing and monitoring osteoporosis [3], is not affected by the presence of alterated soft tissues composition. it would therefore be particularly useful for the evaluation of bone fragility in subjects at risk of osteoarthritis.

References [1] Watts NB. Ost Intern2004;15(11):847–854;

[2] Blake GM, Fogelman I. J Bone Min Res 2008; doi: 10.1359/JBMR.0711;

[3] Di Paola M, et al. Ost Int2018; doi:10.1007/s00198-018-4686-3.

Disclosure of Interests: None declared