Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The prevention of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in eastern and in western countries

  • Fjorda Koromani
  • , Jiawei Li
  • , Hiroshi Hagino
  • , the East Meets West Action Group of the European Calcified Tissue Society
  • , Richard Eastell
  • , Annegreet Vlug
  • , Ling Wang
  • , Hua Yue
  • , Yong Chan Ha
  • , Steven Cummings
  • , Salvatore Minisola
  • , Claus C. Glüer
  • , Ling Oei*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Tottori University
  • University of Sheffield
  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University
  • Hospital
  • California Pacific Medical Center
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • Beijing Jishuitan Hospital
  • University of Rome La Sapienza
  • Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
29 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VFs) are among the most common and clinically significant manifestations of skeletal fragility, contributing substantially to morbidity, disability, and future fracture risk worldwide. Yet, their recognition and management remain inconsistent across regions. To explore differences and similarities in the prevalence, diagnosis, management, and prevention of vertebral fractures, the East Meets West (EmW) Action Group of the European Calcified Tissue Society convened a multi-country exchange among clinical and research experts from Europe, the USA, and East Asia. This report summarizes the discussions and synthesizes current knowledge on the topic. Evidence from China, South Korea, Japan, and Germany shows a wide range in reported VF prevalence and incidence, largely influenced by differences in population aging, imaging access, and diagnostic adjudication methods. While lateral spine radiographs remain the standard for detection in both research and clinical care, variable use of quantitative morphometry (QM), semi-quantitative (SQ), and algorithm-based qualitative (ABQ) methods limits comparability. MRI remains the gold standard for assessing fracture acuity, but is not feasible for widespread screening. VFA via DXA is gaining popularity, although underutilized in several settings. Despite the availability of effective pharmacologic treatments, including bisphosphonates, denosumab, and anabolic agents, treatment rates following VF remain suboptimal across all countries studied. None of the countries currently has a nationwide vertebral fracture screening program, although fracture liaison services (FLS) and AI-assisted imaging offer promising pathways forward. The lack of a universally accepted definition and gold standard for VF adjudication continues to hamper clinical decision-making and data harmonization. This report highlights the need for greater international consensus on diagnostic criteria, improved integration of vertebral fracture screening into clinical workflows, and the development of targeted strategies to close treatment gaps and reduce the global burden of vertebral fractures.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101851
JournalBone Reports
Volume25
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Authors

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The prevention of osteoporotic vertebral fractures in eastern and in western countries'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this