Literature DB >> 1547807

Measurements of bone mineral density of the proximal femur by two commercially available dual energy X-ray absorptiometric systems.

O L Svendsen1, U Marslew, C Hassager, C Christiansen.   

Abstract

Two dual energy X-ray absorptiometric (DXA) instruments have recently become commercially available for local bone densitometry: the QDR-1000 (Hologic Inc.) and the DPX (Lunar Radiation Corp.). We report the precision, influence of femoral rotation, correlation and agreement of bone mineral measurements of the proximal femur by these two instruments. In vitro (femur phantom) short-term precision was 1.1%-3.5%, and the long-term precision was 1.2%-3.8%. In vivo (groups of 10 premenopausal and 10 post-menopausal women) short-term precision of duplicate measurements was 1.6%-4.7%, and long-term precision was 1.9%-5.5%. Overall, the precision for Ward's triangle was over 3% and that for the femoral neck and trochanter, 2%-3%. Rotation of a femur phantom produced a statistically significant change in the bone mineral density (BMD) of the femoral neck. Within a clinically relevant range of femoral rotation (20 degrees inward rotation +/- 5 degrees) the coefficient of variation (CV%) increased by a mean factor of 1.1-1.4. Although the correlation (r less than 0.9) between BMD measurements of the proximal femur by the DPX and QDR-1000 in 30 postmenopausal women was high, there was lack of agreement between the two instruments. We found no statistically significant differences between the right and left femur in 30 postmenopausal women. A bilateral femur scan took a mean total time of about 22 min. We conclude that with the introduction of DXA instruments, the precision of bone mineral measurements of the proximal femur has improved. However, for comparability between commercially available DXA instruments, it might be advantageous if units were standardized.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1547807     DOI: 10.1007/bf00178307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0340-6997


  14 in total

1.  Comparative study of the performances of X-ray and gadolinium 153 bone densitometers at the level of the spine, femoral neck and femoral shaft.

Authors:  D O Slosman; R Rizzoli; B Buchs; F Piana; A Donath; J P Bonjour
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1990

2.  Acronym for dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  C R Wilson; B D Collier; G F Carrera; D R Jacobson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Comparative assessment of dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy radiography.

Authors:  C C Glüer; P Steiger; R Selvidge; K Elliesen-Kliefoth; C Hayashi; H K Genant
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry of the lumbar spine: clinical experience with two different systems.

Authors:  C R Gundry; C W Miller; E Ramos; A Moscona; J A Stein; R B Mazess; D J Sartoris; D Resnick
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  A comparison of quantitative dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  L Strause; M Bracker; P Saltman; D Sartoris; E Kerr
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Simulation studies of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  J A Sorenson; P R Duke; S W Smith
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1989 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Comparison of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  H W Wahner; W L Dunn; M L Brown; R L Morin; B L Riggs
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 7.616

9.  The impact of measurement errors on the diagnostic value of bone mass measurements: theoretical considerations.

Authors:  C Hassager; S B Jensen; A Gotfredsen; C Christiansen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Quantitative digital radiography versus dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  T L Kelly; D M Slovik; D A Schoenfeld; R M Neer
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 5.958

View more
  8 in total

1.  The effects of standardization and reference values on patient classification for spine and femur dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  A Simmons; D E Simpson; M J O'Doherty; S Barrington; A J Coakley
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  The impact of clothing style on bone mineral density among women in Turkey.

Authors:  D Alper Hayirlioglu; Husnu Gokaslan; Canan Cimsit; N Ozden Serin
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-11-16       Impact factor: 2.631

3.  Measurements of bone mineral density in the lumbar spine and proximal femur using lunar prodigy and the new pencil-beam dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  Dongil Choi; Deog-Yoon Kim; Chung Soo Han; Seonwoo Kim; Hae Sook Bok; Wooseong Huh; Jae-Wook Ko; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  European semi-anthropomorphic spine phantom for the calibration of bone densitometers: assessment of precision, stability and accuracy. The European Quantitation of Osteoporosis Study Group.

Authors:  J Pearson; J Dequeker; M Henley; J Bright; J Reeve; W Kalender; A M Laval-Jeantet; P Rüegsegger; D Felsenberg; J Adams
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Anteroposterior and lateral spinal DXA for the assessment of vertebral body strength: comparison with hip and forearm measurement.

Authors:  K Bjarnason; C Hassager; O L Svendsen; H Stang; C Christiansen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Spine and femur BMD by DXA in patients with varying severity spinal osteoporosis.

Authors:  P J Ryan; G M Blake; R Herd; J Parker; I Fogelman
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  The Lichfield bone study: the skeletal response to exercise in healthy young men.

Authors:  Kyriacos I Eleftheriou; Jaikirty S Rawal; Anthony Kehoe; Laurence E James; John R Payne; James R Skipworth; Zudin A Puthucheary; Fotios Drenos; Dudley J Pennell; Mike Loosemore; Michael World; Steve E Humphries; Fares S Haddad; Hugh E Montgomery
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2011-11-23

8.  Relationship between calcaneal quantitative ultrasound and hip dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in young healthy men.

Authors:  J Rawal; K Eleftheriou; J Skipworth; Z Puthucheary; M Loosemore; J Payne; F Dreno; M World; F Haddad; S Humphries; H Montgomery
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 4.507

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.