Literature DB >> 19859644

Does standardized BMD still remove differences between Hologic and GE-Lunar state-of-the-art DXA systems?

B Fan1, Y Lu, H Genant, T Fuerst, J Shepherd.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The standardized bone mineral density (sBMD) values, derived using universal standardized equations, were shown to be equivalent within 1.0% for hip but significantly different for spine for state-of-art fan-beam dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) Hologic and GE-Lunar systems. Spine L1-L4 and L2-L4 sBMD mean differences between the two systems were 0.042 g/cm(2) (4.1%) and 0.035 g/cm(2) (3.2%), respectively.
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study is to validate the 1994 pencil-beam DXA "universal standardization equations" for state-of-the-art fan-beam DXA systems.
METHODS: The spine and bilateral femurs of 87 postmenopausal women were scanned on both Hologic Delphi and GE-Lunar Prodigy DXA systems at three different clinical centers. The scans were analyzed using Hologic Apex and GE-Lunar EnCore software. The BMD results were converted to sBMD using the equations previously developed. Linear regression analysis was used to describe the relationship of the two systems' BMD results. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the differences in measures.
RESULTS: The Apex and Prodigy sBMD values were highly correlated (r ranged from 0.92 to 0.98). Spine L1-L4 and L2-L4 sBMD values had significant intercepts and slopes for Bland-Altman regression, with mean differences of 0.042 g/cm(2) (4.1%) and 0.035 g/cm(2) (3.2%), respectively. The total hip and neck sBMD showed no significant intercept and slope, except left total sBMD had a significant difference between the two systems of 0.009 g/cm(2) (1.0%).
CONCLUSIONS: The sBMD values were shown to be equivalent within 1.0% for hip but were significantly different for spine on the two systems. Biases may persist in pooled sBMD data from different manufacturers, and further study is necessary to determine the cause.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19859644      PMCID: PMC2906746          DOI: 10.1007/s00198-009-1062-3

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


  17 in total

1.  Standardization of BMD measurements.

Authors:  C A Formica
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Universal standardization of bone density measurements: a method with optimal properties for calibration among several instruments.

Authors:  S L Hui; S Gao; X H Zhou; C C Johnston; Y Lu; C C Glüer; S Grampp; H Genant
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  Correcting the magnification error of fan beam densitometers.

Authors:  M R Griffiths; K A Noakes; N A Pocock
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 6.741

4.  Standardization of proximal femur bone mineral density (BMD) measurements by DXA. International Committee for Standards in Bone Measurement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Universal standardization for dual X-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results.

Authors:  H K Genant
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Universal standardization for dual x-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results.

Authors:  H K Genant; S Grampp; C C Glüer; K G Faulkner; M Jergas; K Engelke; S Hagiwara; C Van Kuijk
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Dual X-ray absorptiometry: cross-calibration of a new fan-beam system.

Authors:  G M Blake; E J Harrison; J E Adams
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.333

8.  Differences between dual X-ray absorptiometry using pencil beam and fan beam modes and their determinants in vivo and in vitro.

Authors:  A G Ruetsche; K Lippuner; P Jaeger; J P Casez
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.963

9.  Comparison of pencil-beam and fan-beam DXA systems.

Authors:  Sarah Henzell; Satvinder S Dhaliwal; Roger I Price; Faye Gill; Chandra Ventouras; Carmel Green; Fatima Da Fonseca; Marianne Holzherr; Richard Prince
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  Improved precision with Hologic Apex software.

Authors:  B Fan; E M Lewiecki; M Sherman; Y Lu; P D Miller; H K Genant; J A Shepherd
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-03-29       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  36 in total

1.  Normative bone mineral density z-scores for Canadians aged 16 to 24 years: the Canadian Multicenter Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  Wei Zhou; Lisa Langsetmo; Claudie Berger; Jonathan D Adachi; Alexandra Papaioannou; George Ioannidis; Colin Webber; Stephanie A Atkinson; Wojciech P Olszynski; Jacques P Brown; David A Hanley; Robert Josse; Nancy Kreiger; Jerilynn Prior; Stephanie Kaiser; Susan Kirkland; David Goltzman; Kenneth Shawn Davison
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2010-05-31       Impact factor: 2.617

2.  Cortical and trabecular bone microarchitecture as an independent predictor of incident fracture risk in older women and men in the Bone Microarchitecture International Consortium (BoMIC): a prospective study.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Samelson; Kerry E Broe; Hanfei Xu; Laiji Yang; Steven Boyd; Emmanuel Biver; Pawel Szulc; Jonathan Adachi; Shreyasee Amin; Elizabeth Atkinson; Claudie Berger; Lauren Burt; Roland Chapurlat; Thierry Chevalley; Serge Ferrari; David Goltzman; David A Hanley; Marian T Hannan; Sundeep Khosla; Ching-Ti Liu; Mattias Lorentzon; Dan Mellstrom; Blandine Merle; Maria Nethander; René Rizzoli; Elisabeth Sornay-Rendu; Bert Van Rietbergen; Daniel Sundh; Andy Kin On Wong; Claes Ohlsson; Serkalem Demissie; Douglas P Kiel; Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 32.069

Review 3.  Bone mineral density at femoral neck and lumbar spine in adults with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis and review of the literature.

Authors:  V N Shah; K K Harrall; C S Shah; T L Gallo; P Joshee; J K Snell-Bergeon; W M Kohrt
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-06-03       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D cutoffs for functional bone measures in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Authors:  D Y Lee; J H Jee; Y Y Cho; J Y Jang; T Y Yu; T H Kim; Y J Hong; W-J Hong; S-M Jin; K Y Hur; J H Kim; S W Kim; J H Chung; M K Lee; Y-K Min
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Reference values of bone mineral density and prevalence of osteoporosis in Chinese adults.

Authors:  Z-Q Zhang; S C Ho; Z-Q Chen; C-X Zhang; Y-M Chen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Comparison of novel DXA system, Shimazu SONIALVISION G4, with GE-Lunar PRODIGY.

Authors:  Toki Takemoto; Takeshi Oguchi; Koji Oda
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 2.626

7.  Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis.

Authors:  A Moayyeri; J E Adams; R A Adler; M-A Krieg; D Hans; J Compston; E M Lewiecki
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  The recent prevalence of osteoporosis and low bone mass in the United States based on bone mineral density at the femoral neck or lumbar spine.

Authors:  Nicole C Wright; Anne C Looker; Kenneth G Saag; Jeffrey R Curtis; Elizabeth S Delzell; Susan Randall; Bess Dawson-Hughes
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Longitudinal changes in calcium and vitamin D intakes and relationship to bone mineral density in a prospective population-based study: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos).

Authors:  W Zhou; L Langsetmo; C Berger; S Poliquin; N Kreiger; S I Barr; S M Kaiser; R G Josse; J C Prior; T E Towheed; T Anastassiades; K S Davison; C S Kovacs; D A Hanley; E A Papadimitropoulos; D Goltzman
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.041

10.  Evaluating spine micro-architectural texture (via TBS) discriminates major osteoporotic fractures from controls both as well as and independent of site matched BMD: the Eastern European TBS study.

Authors:  Jelena Vasic; Tzvetanka Petranova; Vladyslav Povoroznyuk; Carmen Gabriela Barbu; Mirjana Karadzic; Filip Gojkovic; Jelena Elez; Renaud Winzenrieth; Didier Hans; Violeta CulaficVojinovic; Catalina Poiana; Nataliia Dzerovych; Rasho Rashkov; Aleksandar Dimic
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 2.626

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.