To browse Academia. The risk for fragility fracture represents a problem of enormous magnitude. It is estimated that only a small fraction of women with this risk take the benefit of preventive measures.
The relationship between estrogen and bone mass is well known as they are the other factors related to the risk for fracture. There are precise diagnostic methods, including a tool to diagnose the risk for fracture.
Yet there continues to be an under-diagnosis, with the unrecoverable delay in instituting preventive measures. Women under the age of 70 years, being much more numerous than those older, and having risk factors, are a group in which it is essential to avoid that first fragility fracture. Today it is usual not to differentiate between the treatment and the prevention of osteoporosis since the common aim is to prevent fragility fractures.
Included in this are women with osteoporosis or with low bone mass and increased risk for fracture, for whom risk factors play a primary role. There is clearly controversy over the type of treatment and its duration, especially given the possible adverse effects of long-term use.
This justifies the concept of sequential treatment, even more so in women under the age of 70, since they presumably will need treatment for many years. Bone metabolism is age-dependent. In postmenopausal women under 70 years of age, the increase in bone resorption is clearly predominant, related to a sharp drop in estrogens. Thus a logical treatment is the prevention of fragility fractures by hormone replacement therapy HRT and, in asymptomatic women, selective estradiol receptor modulators SERMs.
