Literature DB >> 17846861

In vivo 3D reconstruction of human vertebrae with the three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA) method.

S Kolta1, S Quiligotti, A Ruyssen-Witrand, A Amido, D Mitton, A Le Bras, W Skalli, C Roux.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We used a standard DXA device equipped with a C-arm to do in vivo reconstruction of human vertebrae from two orthogonal scans. This new technique, called 3D-XA (three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry), allows the direct measurement of geometric parameters of the vertebrae with a good accuracy and precision.
INTRODUCTION: Geometric parameters are predictors of bone strength. A technique called three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA) allows 3D reconstruction of bones from DXA scans. We used the 3D-XA method to reconstruct human vertebrae and to evaluate the method's in vitro accuracy and in vivo precision.
METHODS: A standard DXA device equipped with a C-arm was used. Calibration of its environment and identification of different anatomical landmarks of the vertebrae allows personalized 3D geometric reconstruction of vertebrae. Accuracy was calculated by reconstructing 16 dry human vertebrae by 3D-XA and CT scanner. In vivo inter-observer precision was calculated using 20 human spines.
RESULTS: The mean difference between 3D reconstruction by CT and 3D-XA was -0.2 +/- 1.3 mm. The in vivo mean difference of the 3D-XA method between the two rheumatologists was -0.1 +/- 0.8 mm. For geometric parameters, mean difference ranged from 0.4 to 0.9 mm. For cross-sectional area and vertebral body volume, it was 2.9% and 3.2%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: This study shows the good accuracy and precision of 3D-XA using a standard DXA device. It yields complementary information on bone geometry. Further studies are needed to evaluate if, coupled with bone density, it improves vertebral fracture risk prediction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17846861     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-007-0447-4

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


  36 in total

1.  Fast accurate stereoradiographic 3D-reconstruction of the spine using a combined geometric and statistic model.

Authors:  Vincent Pomero; David Mitton; Sébastien Laporte; Jacques A de Guise; Wafa Skalli
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  Three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA): a method for reconstruction of human bones using a dual X-ray absorptiometry device.

Authors:  S Kolta; A Le Bras; D Mitton; V Bousson; J A de Guise; J Fechtenbaum; J D Laredo; C Roux; W Skalli
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is also an accurate and precise method to measure the dimensions of human long bones.

Authors:  H Sievänen; P Kannus; P Oja; I Vuori
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  Age-related changes in vertebral height ratios and vertebral fracture.

Authors:  T Sone; T Tomomitsu; M Miyake; N Takeda; M Fukunaga
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  [Computer graphic analysis of the three dimensional deformities of scoliotic vertebrae].

Authors:  C Landry; J A De Guise; J Dansereau; H Labelle; W Skalli; R Zeller; F Lavaste
Journal:  Ann Chir       Date:  1997

6.  Cross-sectional area of lumbar vertebrae in peri- and postmenopausal patients with and without osteoporosis.

Authors:  T M Link; M Dören; G Lewing; N Meier; A Heinecke; E Rummeny
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Sexual dimorphism in vertebral fragility is more the result of gender differences in age-related bone gain than bone loss.

Authors:  Y Duan; C H Turner; B T Kim; E Seeman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 6.741

8.  Sex differences in age-related changes in vertebral body size, density and biomechanical competence in normal individuals.

Authors:  L Mosekilde; L Mosekilde
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 4.398

9.  Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W Browner; J Cauley; K Ensrud; H K Genant; L Palermo; J Scott; T M Vogt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-01-09       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Bone loss and bone size after menopause.

Authors:  Henrik G Ahlborg; Olof Johnell; Charles H Turner; Gunnar Rannevik; Magnus K Karlsson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-07-24       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  4 in total

1.  Sensitivity of patient-specific vertebral finite element model from low dose imaging to material properties and loading conditions.

Authors:  Christophe Travert; Erwan Jolivet; Emilie Sapin-de Brosses; David Mitton; Wafa Skalli
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Quantitative vertebral morphometry based on parametric modeling of vertebral bodies in 3D.

Authors:  D Stern; V Njagulj; B Likar; F Pernuš; T Vrtovec
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 3.  Review of radiological scoring methods of osteoporotic vertebral fractures for clinical and research settings.

Authors:  Ling Oei; Fernando Rivadeneira; Felisia Ly; Stephan J Breda; M Carola Zillikens; Albert Hofman; André G Uitterlinden; Gabriel P Krestin; Edwin H G Oei
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Analysis of the evolution of cortical and trabecular bone compartments in the proximal femur after spinal cord injury by 3D-DXA.

Authors:  L Gifre; L Humbert; A Muxi; L Del Rio; J Vidal; E Portell; A Monegal; N Guañabens; P Peris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 4.507

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.