Literature DB >> 20807844

Measurement of thoracic bone mineral density with quantitative CT.

Matthew J Budoff1, Yasmin S Hamirani, Yanlin L Gao, Hussain Ismaeel, Ferdinand R Flores, Janis Child, Sivi Carson, James N Nee, Songshou Mao.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To create standard thoracic bone mineral density (BMD) values for patients undergoing cardiac computed tomography (CT) by using thoracic quantitative CT and to compare these BMDs (in a subpopulation) with those obtained by using lumbar spine quantitative CT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this HIPAA-compliant study. A total of 9585 asymptomatic subjects (mean age, 56 years; age range, 30-90 years) who underwent coronary artery calcium scanning, including 4131 women, were examined. Patients with vertebral deformities or fractures were excluded. Six hundred forty-four subjects (322 of whom were female) also underwent lumbar quantitative CT. The mean thoracic vertebral BMDs for both sexes were reported separately in a subgroup of subjects aged 30 years and in 29 age-based subgroups in 2-year intervals from ages 30 to 90 years. The formulas used to calculate the female T score (T(f)) and the male T score (T(m)) on the basis of thoracic quantitative CT measurements were as follows: T(f) = (BMD(im) - 222)/36, and T(m) = (BMD(im) - 215)/33, where BMD(im) is the individual mean BMD. Comparisons between thoracic quantitative CT and lumbar quantitative CT measurements, as well as analyses of intraobserver, interobserver, and interscan variability, were performed.
RESULTS: The young-subgroup mean BMD was 221.9 mg/mL ± 36.2 (standard deviation) for the female subjects and 215.2 mg/mL ± 33.2 for the male subjects. The mean thoracic BMDs for the female and male subjects were found to be 20.7% higher and 17.0% higher, respectively, than the values measured with lumbar quantitative CT (P < .001 for both comparisons). A significant positive association between the thoracic and lumbar quantitative CT measurements (r > 0.85, P < .001) was found. Intraobserver, interobserver, and interscan variabilities in thoracic quantitative CT measurements were 2.5%, 2.6%, and 2.8%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: There was a significant association between the mean thoracic and lumbar BMDs. Therefore, standard derived measurements (young-subgroup BMD ± standard deviation) based on these data can be used with thoracic CT images to estimate the bone mineral status. © RSNA, 2010.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20807844     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100132

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  25 in total

Review 1.  Academic radiology in the new health care delivery environment.

Authors:  Aliya Qayyum; John-Paul J Yu; Akash P Kansagra; Nathaniel von Fischer; Daniel Costa; Matthew Heller; Stamatis Kantartzis; R Scooter Plowman; Jason Itri
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.173

2.  How does semi-automated computer-derived CT measure of breast density compare with subjective assessments to assess mean glandular breast density, in patients with breast cancer?

Authors:  G J Bansal; S Kotugodella
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Computed tomography shows high fracture prevalence among physically active forager-horticulturalists with high fertility.

Authors:  Jonathan Stieglitz; Benjamin C Trumble; Caleb E Finch; Dong Li; Matthew J Budoff; Hillard Kaplan; Michael D Gurven
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 4.  Imaging approaches to understand disease complexity: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as a clinical model.

Authors:  Karin J C Sanders; Samuel Y Ash; George R Washko; Felix M Mottaghy; Annemie M W J Schols
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2017-07-27

5.  Cervical spine bone density in young healthy adults as a function of sex, vertebral level and anatomic location.

Authors:  William J Anderst; Tyler West; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Effects of estrogen with micronized progesterone on cortical and trabecular bone mass and microstructure in recently postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Joshua N Farr; Sundeep Khosla; Yuko Miyabara; Virginia M Miller; Ann E Kearns
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 5.958

Review 7.  Advancing and sharing the knowledge base of CT screening for lung cancer.

Authors:  David F Yankelevitz; Claudia I Henschke
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-04

8.  Novel Genetic Variants Associated With Increased Vertebral Volumetric BMD, Reduced Vertebral Fracture Risk, and Increased Expression of SLC1A3 and EPHB2.

Authors:  Carrie M Nielson; Ching-Ti Liu; Albert V Smith; Cheryl L Ackert-Bicknell; Sjur Reppe; Johanna Jakobsdottir; Christina Wassel; Thomas C Register; Ling Oei; Nerea Alonso; Edwin H Oei; Neeta Parimi; Elizabeth J Samelson; Mike A Nalls; Joseph Zmuda; Thomas Lang; Mary Bouxsein; Jeanne Latourelle; Melina Claussnitzer; Kristin Siggeirsdottir; Priya Srikanth; Erik Lorentzen; Liesbeth Vandenput; Carl Langefeld; Laura Raffield; Greg Terry; Amanda J Cox; Matthew A Allison; Michael H Criqui; Don Bowden; M Arfan Ikram; Dan Mellström; Magnus K Karlsson; John Carr; Matthew Budoff; Caroline Phillips; L Adrienne Cupples; Wen-Chi Chou; Richard H Myers; Stuart H Ralston; Kaare M Gautvik; Peggy M Cawthon; Steven Cummings; David Karasik; Fernando Rivadeneira; Vilmundur Gudnason; Eric S Orwoll; Tamara B Harris; Claes Ohlsson; Douglas P Kiel; Yi-Hsiang Hsu
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  The relation of low levels of bone mineral density with coronary artery calcium and mortality.

Authors:  N Ahmadi; S S Mao; F Hajsadeghi; B Arnold; S Kiramijyan; Y Gao; F Flores; S Azen; M Budoff
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 10.  New imaging modalities in bone.

Authors:  James F Griffith; Harry K Genant
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.592

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.