SVF
Insufficient· Insufficient EvidenceNarrative Review

"One-stop-shop" medical imaging for osteoporosis and obese patients: a narrative review.

Zhang L., Lei H., Li Y., Yang H., Zhao H.

Narrative Review on Back & Spine, published in J Endocrinol Invest (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
J Endocrinol Invest (2026)
Country
Italy
Reported sample size
—
PMID
41999439
DOI
10.1007/s40618-026-02810-w

Abstract (original English)

BACKGROUND: Obesity and osteoporosis frequently coexist. Assessing them separately can miss obesity-related bias in lumbar aBMD and fragility driven by impaired bone quality. To deliver a practical, scenario-based “one-stop-shop” that simultaneously characterizes adiposity and bone status. METHODS: Narrative review framed by PICO. We searched the MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to evaluate various imaging modalities for obesity and osteoporosis, as well as their feasibility for “one-stop-shop”. RESULTS: Pathophysiologically, expansion of bone-marrow adipose tissue, adipokine/hormonal dysregulation, and mesenchymal stem-cell adipogenic shift, reduces bone mass. Clinically, the feasibility of mainstream imaging techniques for “one-stop-shop” is evaluated: As diagnostic tools, QCT and DXA cater precisely to the requirements of clinical diagnosis, providing reliable evidence for disease confirmation. As screening tools, both perform exceptionally well; among them, DXA, with its distinct advantages of lower radiation exposure and cost-effectiveness, is particularly suited for large-scale preliminary screening of populations. Additionally, DECT, MRI, and ultrasound can serve as effective supplementary tools, enhancing the comprehensive assessment of bone health and obesity. CONCLUSIONS: This review focuses on the field of obesity-osteoporosis comorbidity. It dec

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

There is currently not enough data to draw conclusions about benefit or risk for this topic.

How we grade evidence
HumansOsteoporosisObesityDiagnostic ImagingBone Density
Back & Spine
View on PubMedDOI

Related research