Bone mineral density and XXXX in @entity2689 .

@entity1 @entity172 @entity174 @entity170 @entity2689
PURPOSE: To determine whether @entity1 with @entity2689 who were treated with @entity172 were more likely to have @entity170 and @entity174 . METHODS: Areal bone density at the lumbar spine and femoral neck was measured in 40 adult @entity1 with @entity2689 and 43 age-matched healthy @entity1 using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Histories of @entity172 treatment and @entity174 were obtained by structured personal interviews. RESULTS: Mean (+/- SD) areal bone density was significantly lower at the lumbar spine (0.87 +/- 0.11 g/cm(2) vs. 0.98 +/- 0.10 g/cm(2), P <0.001) and femoral neck (0.68 +/- 0.07 g/ cm(2) vs. 0.83 +/- 0.08 g/cm(2), P <0.001) in @entity1 with @entity2689 than in controls. The diagnostic criterion for @entity170 (T-score <-2.5) was met by 8 @entity1 with @entity2689 (20%) with scores at the lumbar spine and by 3 (8%) with scores at the femoral neck. All @entity1 diagnosed with @entity170 were less than 150 cm in height. Areal bone density correlated significantly with height (lumbar spine: R(2) = 0.3, P <0.001; femoral neck: R(2) = 0.4, P <0.001). Adjustments for skeletal size reduced the differences between the groups as well as the number of @entity1 diagnosed with @entity170 (e.g., from 8 to 2 @entity1 based on lumbar spine scores). The prevalence and type of @entity174 were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of @entity170 and @entity174 is not increased significantly in @entity1 with @entity2689 who are treated with standard @entity172 therapy. @entity1 less than 150 cm in height are likely to be misdiagnosed with @entity170 when areal bone density is measured, unless adjustments for body size are made.
