Literature DB >> 11305080

Quantitative ultrasound of the tibia depends on both cortical density and thickness.

S Prevrhal1, T Fuerst, B Fan, C Njeh, D Hans, M Uffmann, S Srivastav, H K Genant.   

Abstract

This study investigated whether tibial speed of sound (SOS; SoundScan 2000, Myriad Ultrasound Systems, Israel) reflects not only bone mineral density (BMD) but also tibial cortical thickness, as assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and Quantitative CT (QCT) at a site-matched location. The secondary focus of the study was how tibial SOS compares with BMD at the spine and the hip, the most widely used locations for densitometry. Twenty-two young normal (N) and 23 postmenopausal women with spinal fractures (Fx) (mean (SD) age 35 (8) and 70 (5) years) underwent quantitative ultrasound (QUS) SOS measurement at the left tibial midshaft. From site-matched QCT scans (three 3-mm slices spaced along the QUS measurement region), BMD and cortical thickness were computed (QCT-cBMD, QCT-cTh). The cortex in the CT images was then subdivided into three concentric and equally spaced bands, and QCT-cBMD was computed separately for each band. DXA was performed at the mid-tibia (TIB BMD), at the spine (SPINE BMD) and the hip (total hip, HIP BMD). Correlation coefficients between parameters were determined with least-square linear fits. Intergroup differences were assessed by analysis of covariance, whose r2 value reflects the percentage variation in the data explained by group assignment. SOS correlated significantly with site-matched parameters (QCT-cBMD, OCT-cTh and TIB BMD, all r = 0.6, p < 0.001), SPINE BMD and HIP BMD (both r = 0.5, p < 0.001). Multiple regression with both QCT-cBMD and QCT-cTh against SOS yielded r = 0.7 with both parameters contributing significantly. For the cortex band subdivision, SOS correlated better with QCT-cBMD in the outermost band of the cortex (r = 0.67) than with the more central bands (r = 0.59 and r = 0.53). Group assignment could best explain SPINE BMD (r2 = 0.62) and HIP BMD (r2 = 0.51). SOS was comparable to TIB BMD (r2 = 0.3 vs. r2 = 0.35).: Our findings suggest that the tibial SOS measurement depends on both the thickness and density of the tibia, but is more strongly influenced by the density of the cortex near the surface than by its interior parts. The power of tibial ultrasound to discriminate between normal and fracture patients was less than that of spinal and femoral DXA BMD and comparable to site-matched DXA BMD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11305080     DOI: 10.1007/s001980170154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  23 in total

1.  Assessment of the tibia using ultrasonic guided waves in pubertal girls.

Authors:  P Moilanen; P H F Nicholson; T Kärkkäinen; Q Wang; J Timonen; S Cheng
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Can geometry-based parameters from pQCT and material parameters from quantitative ultrasound (QUS) improve the prediction of radial bone strength over that by bone mass (DXA)?

Authors:  M Hudelmaier; V Kuhn; E M Lochmüller; H Well; M Priemel; T M Link; F Eckstein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-01-22       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Low-frequency axial ultrasound velocity correlates with bone mineral density and cortical thickness in the radius and tibia in pre- and postmenopausal women.

Authors:  V Kilappa; P Moilanen; L Xu; P H F Nicholson; J Timonen; S Cheng
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-06-25       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  High bone mineral density in loaded skeletal regions of former professional football (soccer) players: what is the effect of time after active career?

Authors:  K Uzunca; M Birtane; G Durmus-Altun; F Ustun
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 13.800

5.  Use of multiple acoustic wave modes for assessment of long bones: model study.

Authors:  Alexey Tatarinov; Noune Sarvazyan; Armen Sarvazyan
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2005-03-31       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 6.  [Quantitative ultrasound].

Authors:  R Barkmann; C-C Glüer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 0.635

7.  Multi-frequency axial transmission bone ultrasonometer.

Authors:  Alexey Tatarinov; Vladimir Egorov; Noune Sarvazyan; Armen Sarvazyan
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2013-10-12       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 8.  Topography of acoustical properties of long bones: from biomechanical studies to bone health assessment.

Authors:  Alexey Tatarinov; Armen Sarvazyan
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.725

9.  An assessment of the use of quantitative ultrasound and the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians in determining the risk of nonvertebral fracture in postmenopausal Chinese women.

Authors:  Bei Tao; Jian-min Liu; Xiao-ying Li; Ji-guang Wang; Wei-qing Wang; Guang Ning
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.626

10.  Osteoporosis in children: pediatric and pediatric rheumatology perspective: a review.

Authors:  Yosef Uziel; Eyal Zifman; Philip J Hashkes
Journal:  Pediatr Rheumatol Online J       Date:  2009-10-16       Impact factor: 3.054

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.