Literature DB >> 1589177

Comparison of instruments for dual-energy X-ray bone mineral densitometry.

P Vainio1, E Ahonen, K Leinonen, H Sievänen, E Koski.   

Abstract

While bone mineral densitometry has become a common laboratory test, it is important to pay attention to the compatibility of the results from different instruments. In this study results from three commercially available bone densitometers are compared using both patient and phantom studies. Overall correlation between instruments was good but there were systematic discrepancies in the results. The three instruments provided bone mineral density (BMD) values that differed by as much as 13.5% due to differences as large as 6% in bone mineral content and as large as 7% in bone area. Thus, the BMD values obtained from different manufacturers' instruments are not directly comparable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1589177     DOI: 10.1097/00006231-199204000-00156

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Commun        ISSN: 0143-3636            Impact factor:   1.690


  3 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.  Cross-calibration of DXA scanners for spine measurements.

Authors:  P Tothill
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Exercise, smoking, and calcium intake during adolescence and early adulthood as determinants of peak bone mass. Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study Group.

Authors:  M J Välimäki; M Kärkkäinen; C Lamberg-Allardt; K Laitinen; E Alhava; J Heikkinen; O Impivaara; P Mäkelä; J Palmgren; R Seppänen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1994-07-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.