↓ Skip to main content

Osteoporosis, bone mineral density and CKD–MBD: treatment considerations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nephrology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
Title
Osteoporosis, bone mineral density and CKD–MBD: treatment considerations
Published in
Journal of Nephrology, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40620-017-0404-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jordi Bover, Lucía Bailone, Víctor López-Báez, Silvia Benito, Paola Ciceri, Andrea Galassi, Mario Cozzolino

Abstract

Osteoporosis and chronic kidney disease (CKD) have both independently important potential impact on bone health. A significant number of patients with CKD stages 3a-5D have been shown to have low bone mineral density (BMD), leading to a strikingly elevated risk of fractures (mainly hip fractures) and higher associated morbidity and mortality. Mechanical properties of bone beyond age and menopausal status are additionally affected by intrinsic uremic factors. Therefore, we review in this article not only general concepts of osteoporosis and related consequences, but also the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of low BMD and bone fractures in CKD, beyond increased vascular calcification. Antiresorptive agents (mainly bisphosphonates) were not previously recommended when the estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was lower than 30 ml/min/1.73 m(2). However, post-hoc analysis of large randomized clinical trials found that these drugs (i.e. alendronate, ribandronate, denosumab) had comparable efficacy in improving BMD and reducing fracture risk in individuals (mainly women) with moderate reductions of GFR (mostly CKD stages 3-4). Therefore, at least in the absence of clear abnormalities of CKD-related mineral metabolism disturbances, bone antiresorptive agents (and maybe anabolic agents) that are or will be approved for general osteoporosis may be appropriate for CKD. Nephrologists should probably not ignore any longer fracture risk assessment, especially in patients with additional risk factors for osteoporosis if results will impact treatment decisions. However, although different therapeutic agents have been shown to reduce the risk of fracture in CKD patients with low BMD, specific prospective studies, with or without bone biopsies, in CKD are urgently needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Master 10 8%
Other 9 7%
Other 30 23%
Unknown 39 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Engineering 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 47 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2022.
All research outputs
#14,279,971
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nephrology
#507
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,798
of 313,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nephrology
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.