I have had my dexa scan results for osteoporosos and dont know how to read it. The last scan I had was six years ago and my hips are still at oseoprenia stage. I have been on AA but stopped taking it two months ago. My gp has not been any help except to say Ive done the right thing stopping the aa, but has not advised me further. On my lumbar spine summary what does regions L1, L2, L3, L4 mean. For example my L1 Z score six years ago was -1.4 and is now -0.8. is that better or worse?
ive just received my second dexa scan for osteoporosos and need some advice on how to read it. Can a
Hello Evelyn, sorry I can't be of any help at all but hopefully someone will be along soon to offer some insight into interpreting all the weird readings. All the best, tina
L1-L4 are the measurements of different parts of your lumbar spine. It looks as if there is an improvement, as your current reading for L1 is higher than last time. Z score is a comparison to other people in your age group while the T score is a comparison to people in the age group 20-40, so you would expect your T score to be lower. Perhaps the AA helped!
Hi Evelyn, first re. your hip scores: if your scores are in the osteopenia range, (6 years ago and now) you do not have Osteoporosis (OP) Re. your spine: those readings are in the normal range but a bit better than 6 years ago. . .
Have you actually been taking AA for 6 years ? The reason I'm asking is that a tentative diagnosis of OP is only made when t-scores are - 2.5 or lower - and, even then, there is debate as to whether to use medication or not.
Finally, your GP sounds really unhelpful, or maybe not too clued-in. Can he not interpret a dexa scan result?? At least he gave the right advice to stop the AA now. ( Of course, maybe he put you on it in the first place???). Take care, J
The z-score is pretty meaningless - it is a comparison with other people your age and there isn't a lot of point comparing you with a load of other osteoporitic people is there! If you quote the T-scores we can tell you more. You do need to stop the AA - the recommendation is absolutely not longer than 5 years to avoid increasing the risk of some very unpleasant side effects. They can happen sooner but are more likely after 5 years.
L1-4 are the vertebrae in your lumbar spine, standard numbering so they know which is which and which they are talking about.
Search on here for dexa scan and there are some articles about how to avoid any worsening - there are several so I won't list the links myself.
Thank s to Tina and everybody who replied to my query.. im very grateful to you all and will try to answer all seperately over a few days. All the info I received was very helpful.Many thanks.
ngerous a.a can be if taken over a long period. My doc would have been happy for me to continue taking it indefinately. Im shocked at the potential side effects and am now endevouring to build bone density the natural way.Just hope I have no lasting damage from aa. Ive only myself to blame for being so lax.
There is a generation of doctors who qualified/did further training during the marketing period for Fosamax, the first widely used form of bisphophonate. It was a very clever marketing campaign that told them it was harmless, could be used for years even in healthy women and would make little old ladies falling over and breaking a hip a thing of the past. A bisphosphonate had been used for a very long time, about 40-odd years, for something called Paget's (a bone disease) but it was a different substance and only used for patients with a very unpleasant and relatively unusual disease. Reports of bad aspects were therefore not common - only when a drug is being used a lot in many patients do you see the REAL effects. And long term effects take a long time to raise their heads - especially since doctors don't understand how to use the yellow card reporting system which is how the real rates are worked out. Alendronic acid in its various forms has only been in use for about 15 years or so and in really widespread use for even less, nothing is really widespread until it is available as a cheap generic version.
So now the pigeons are coming home to roost - and people like us are still being accused of being scaremongers who don't understand when wedig out some of the facts and talk about them. However, it even got to Radio 4 last week.
Hi, I just realised that I read the last sentence in your first post as T scores, NOT Z scores, so ignore most of my second paragraph. Really sorry. Therefore, as Eileen so aptly said, if you can tell us your T scores, it would be more helpful . . . J
Hi Juno, My T scores 6 years ago for lower spine (L4) were -3.0 and my recent scan is -3.1. The total reading for entire scan was 56.09 and recent scan is 57.22. The total for t scores has the same reading as first scan -2.6. Im still confused as how to read it properly, but there doesen't seem to be a significant difference does there? It looks too me to have a slight deterioration, considering I was taking AA for 6 years. Im consentrating on trying the natural route and hopefully have a scan in 2 years to see how I go. Any info is good. thanks Eve
If you had T-scores of -3.0 and -3.1 that means those readings for lower spine haven't changed significantly - even when the scans were done on the identical machine they aren't absolute figures anyway. But those figures are well into osteoporitic range, -1.0 to -2.5 is the osteopenia range. So whether the AA did any good or not is questionable - except that it does not BUILD bone, it merely stops it getting worse, and it is very bad you weren't recalled for checks every 2 years if the T-score for the hip was similar.
To make sense of reading it you need the T-scores for hip and vertebrae, that's all. It is common to find vertebrae have poor readings than hip but the hip readings are the most important.
If the hip readings were similar to those for your spine you would need more than just "natural methods" to build bone and there are a couple of options, one of which actively builds bone. It depends how concerned your doctors are about the low score for your spine and that is what you should ask your GP.
If you are in the UK, the National Osteoporosis Society has an excellent helpline where they will help you understand the readings and talk you through your options.
Evelyn, If I were you, I would arrange an apt. with a good Rheumatologist who would do a series of blood tests and then talk it all over with you. The medical thinking seems to be that after 3-4 years of AA (and similiar meds.), you should have a break from them. It may be that he/she would therefore put you on other meds that work differently than AA. Have you had any fractures as this would be important in what he may recommend? Re. 'trying the natural route' - while eating healthily is good for everyone, it simply has not been shown that taking various 'bone building' supplements work. Keep in touch. J
Hi, the Best Study done at the University of Az in 2001 indicated that bone could be built by taking calcium supplementation (Calcium citrate was used) and doing weight bearing exercises. The exercise is not optional. You can google the study and check it out.
Padada, that is correct, weight bearing exercise and PMR is a good mix. Within reason that is of course, we should not be going in for Mr and Mrs Universe competitions.
Under normal circumstances that may be true - but calcium isn't always taken up properly in the gut or into the bones however much you take and it has also been shown that if you take too much it can be taken up into the wrong places like kidneys and artery walls.
It isn't just calcium supplements though - you need enough vit D as well and that needs to be supplemented if you are deficient as, in fact, most people are.
You are right though - the weight bearing exercise isn't optional but that doesn't include swimming and cycling - it has to be body-weight bearing which is something that isn't always pushed.