Bone mass density (BMD) has been used universally in osteoporosis diagnosis and management. Adherence to anti-osteoporosis medication is related to mortality risk. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between mortality and low BMD of the femoral neck and vertebra among patients self-discontinuing anti-osteoporosis medication. Between June 2016 and June 2018, this single-center retrospective study recruited 596 participants who self-discontinued anti-osteoporosis medication. Patients were categorized into four groups by BMD of the right femoral neck and lumbar spine. Occurrence and causes of mortality were obtained from medical records. Independent risk factors and the five-year survival of various levels of BMD were analyzed by Cox regression and the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. BMD value and serum calcium level were significantly lower in the mortality group (p < 0.001). Compared to the reference, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality in patients with lower BMD of both the lumbar spine and femoral neck was 3.03. The five-year cumulative survival rate was also significantly lower (25.2%, p < 0.001). A low calcium level was also associated with mortality (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.76–0.99, p = 0.033). In conclusion, lower BMD and calcium levels were associated with higher mortality risk in patients with poor adherence. Hence, patients self-discontinuing anti-osteoporosis medication should be managed accordingly.

The incidence of hypocalcemia is high in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing denosumab treatment. Since 2018, we have carried out a “multidisciplinary integrated care program for osteoporosis among patients with CKD and ESRD” in our hospital. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of denosumab-associated hypocalcemia among patients with advanced CKD and ESRD before and after the integrated care program. We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients on their first dose of denosumab treatment from January 2012 to December 2021. A total of 3208 patients were included in our study. Among the 3208 patients, there were 101 dialysis patients, 150 patients with advanced CKD (stage 4 and 5), and 2957 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) higher than or equal to 30. The incidence of post-treatment severe hypocalcemia (corrected calcium level less than 7.0 mg/dl) within 30 days was significantly higher in the dialysis and advanced CKD group than in patients with an eGFR higher than or equal to 30 (6.9% vs. 2.0% vs. 0.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). Based on the results of the multivariate regression model, poor renal function (p < 0.05) and lower baseline corrected calcium level (p < 0.05) were associated with severe hypocalcemia within 30 days following the first dose of denosumab treatment. The incidence of post-treatment severe hypocalcemia within 30 days in advanced CKD and dialysis patients was significantly lower after the integrated care program (6.8% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.05). Our study shows that multidisciplinary integrated care may reduce the incidence rate of denosumab-associated severe hypocalcemia among patients with advanced CKD and ESRD.

Objectives: Osteoporosis is a common complication in patients undergoing long-term corticosteroid therapy, particularly those with rheumatological and immunological conditions. Denosumab has shown potential in enhancing bone density and reducing fracture risk in such patients. This study evaluates the effectiveness of denosumab in osteoporosis management among corticosteroid-treated individuals. Methods: Between 2013 and 2022, 390 osteoporosis patients who received denosumab (60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months) for ≤18 months were enrolled. Patients were categorized based on corticosteroid use, and age-matching was applied to ensure comparability. Bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score (TBS) at the lumbar spine and femoral neck were assessed, and secondary fractures during the follow-up period were recorded. Results: Over the 18-month follow-up, both groups showed improvements in lumbar spine T-scores. The corticosteroid group increased from −2.1 ± 1.2 to −2.0 ± 1.3 (p < 0.001), while the non-corticosteroid group improved from −2.6 ± 1.2 to −2.4 ± 1.2 (p = 0.003). However, logistic regression analysis revealed that corticosteroid use remained a significant risk factor for secondary fractures (odds ratio: 1.69; 95% confidence interval: 1.11–2.56, p = 0.014), despite denosumab treatment. Conclusions: This retrospective study observed stabilization and a modest increase in BMD and TBS among corticosteroid users. Although differences in secondary fractures persisted between groups, denosumab shows potential for managing corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis. The study’s focus on Taiwanese patients limits its generalizability, and future research should include diverse populations to enhance applicability.

Background and Objectives: Osteoporosis poses significant health risks, especially among veterans, due to lifestyle factors. This study compares bone density and fracture risks between male veterans and non-veterans. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1427 veterans from the Taichung Veterans General Hospital osteoporosis database (2010–2022), matched 1:1 by age and gender with non-veterans. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Comorbidities, fracture sites, and mortality data were tracked. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify factors influencing fracture risk. Results: The study found that veterans have a higher fracture risk (univariable OR 1.24, multivariable OR 1.20, p < 0.001). Fracture victims were slightly younger in the veterans group (78.7 ± 10.0 years vs. 80.1 ± 9.2 years, p = 0.010), who also had better T-scores in the lumbar spine and left femoral neck. Veterans showed a higher post-fracture mortality rate (39.9% vs. 31.9%, p = 0.001) and a greater incidence of radial fractures (5.01% vs. 2.96%, p = 0.036). Importantly, veterans exhibited a trend toward more hip fractures compared with non-veterans (27.0% vs. 23.6%, p = 1.017), suggesting a potential difference despite not reaching statistical significance. Conclusions: In the present study, we found that veterans have higher rates of comorbidities, and higher mortality after a fracture event, highlighting the need for targeted medical interventions to address these differences. Further intervention to prevent avoidable fractures and the provision of adequate care for long-term osteoporosis management remain critical issues.

Background/Objectives: Fracture liaison services (FLSs) typically use fragility fractures as triggers to identify patients for osteoporosis care. Patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery who already have osteoporosis documented on a preoperative densitometry report fall outside this trigger. This study compared recorded initiation of osteoporosis treatment after elective operations with that after operations performed for a fracture. A secondary, exploratory objective was to describe how preoperative T-score relates to subsequent fractures in patients without recorded treatment. Methods: A retrospective cohort study (2015–2025) was performed at a tertiary center in Taiwan. The source population was the institutional densitometry cohort (all patients with at least one DXA examination at the hospital), within which five index operations were identified: vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty, hip fracture internal fixation, hip arthroplasty (hemi- or total), lumbar spinal fusion, and total knee arthroplasty. Operations in patients already receiving osteoporosis therapy were excluded. The primary outcome was recorded initiation of anti-osteoporosis therapy, defined as the first dispensing at the study hospital within 365 days of surgery. Odds ratios were estimated by logistic regression with patient-clustered standard errors. Results: Among 6171 operations in 5739 patients, recorded one-year initiation was 28.4% overall: 46.9% after vertebroplasty, 43.1% after hip fracture fixation, 33.0% after hip arthroplasty, 17.4% after lumbar fusion, and 7.2% after total knee arthroplasty. Adjusted odds ratios versus fusion ranged from 3.16 (95% CI: 2.69–3.72) for vertebroplasty to 0.28 (0.21–0.37) for knee arthroplasty. Within hip arthroplasty, initiation was 43.9% after hemiarthroplasty, which is performed for femoral neck fracture, and 6.7% after total hip arthroplasty. Across all operations, an accompanying fracture diagnosis was associated with initiation (adjusted OR: 6.19, 5.26–7.29). The contrast persisted among the 871 operations with osteoporosis documented before surgery (48.2% after vertebroplasty, 7.5% after knee arthroplasty). In the exploratory analysis of 1971 operations without recorded treatment (99 fractures), each one-unit lower T-score was associated with a higher hazard of major osteoporotic fracture (adjusted HR: 1.25, 1.04–1.49). The estimate for the T ≤ −2.5 dichotomy was less precise (HR: 1.33, 0.83–2.12). Conclusions: In this selected single-center densitometry cohort, preliminary findings indicate that recorded initiation of osteoporosis treatment after orthopedic surgery followed whether the operation was performed for a fracture rather than the patient’s documented bone density, including among patients whose osteoporosis was already documented. A national reimbursement rule that requires a fracture in addition to low bone density probably contributes. Treatment outside the study hospital was not captured, so initiation proportions are lower bounds. Whether an FLS entry point keyed to existing densitometry results would close this gap remains to be tested.

Background and Objective: Romosozumab carries a warning for potential severe cardiovascular events, while denosumab is widely used for osteoporosis but requires safety considerations in advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Given the limited direct real-world evidence comparing these treatments, in this study, we aimed to compare the cardiovascular and survival outcomes associated with romosozumab versus denosumab in adults with CKD. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study, we utilized de-identified electronic health records from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, where eligible participants were adults aged 40 to 90 years with CKD who initiated either romosozumab or denosumab. Patients with bone/bone marrow malignancies or recent acute cardiovascular events were excluded. Following 1:1 propensity score matching based on demographics, diagnoses, medications, and laboratory characteristics, patients were followed for up to 1095 days. The primary outcome was a composite cardiovascular measure (all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular event), while secondary outcomes included the individual components of the composite outcome and acute heart failure. Outcomes were evaluated using fixed-window cumulative risks, risk ratios (RRs), odds ratios, and hazard-ratio estimates. Results: After 1:1 propensity score matching, 1201 patients remained in each cohort; the mean age was 74.1 years in the romosozumab cohort and 74.2 years in the denosumab cohort, and 94.9% and 93.8%, respectively, were women. Romosozumab was associated with lower 1095-day cumulative risk of the composite cardiovascular outcome than denosumab (12.6% vs. 18.8%; RR, 0.668 [95% CI, 0.553–0.808]), as well as lower cumulative risk of cerebrovascular event (5.0% vs. 7.0%; RR, 0.714 [95% CI, 0.518–0.985]), all-cause mortality (6.6% vs. 9.5%; RR, 0.693 [95% CI, 0.526–0.913]), acute myocardial infarction (3.8% vs. 6.2%; RR, 0.613 [95% CI, 0.429–0.878]), and heart failure (2.7% vs. 6.1%; RR, 0.438 [95% CI, 0.292–0.659]). Conclusions: In this propensity score-matched EHR cohort of adults with CKD, cardiovascular and survival estimates associated with romosozumab versus denosumab varied by follow-up window and analytic approach. Although 1095-day fixed-window cumulative risks were lower in the romosozumab cohort, corresponding time-to-event estimates were neutral or directionally inconsistent. These findings should not be interpreted as evidence of cardioprotection or causal superiority but rather as showing no clear and consistent excess cardiovascular risk signal for romosozumab compared with denosumab.