Literature DB >> 22445540

Quality control for bone quality parameters affected by subject motion in high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography.

Yves Pauchard1, Anna-Maria Liphardt, Heather M Macdonald, David A Hanley, Steven K Boyd.   

Abstract

Subject motion during high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) causes image artifacts that affect morphological analysis of bone quality. The aim of our study was to determine effectiveness of techniques for quality control in the presence of motion in vivo including automated and manual approaches. First, repeatability of manual grading was determined within and between laboratories. Given proper training using a standardized scale and training images (provided by the manufacturer), we found that manual grading is suitable for repeatable image quality grading within and across sites (ICC>0.7). Both a new automated technique providing motion measures based on projection moments, and traditional manual grading (1=best, 5=worst) were subsequently used to assess subject data for motion in N=137 image pairs (scan/re-scan) from the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos) Calgary cohort. High quality image pairs were selected and measurement precision was estimated by calculating the coefficient of variation (CV). Consistent with previous data, density parameters (e.g. total bone mineral density) are more robust than structural (e.g. trabecular number) or finite element parameters (e.g. failure load). To obtain acceptable measurement precision, images should not exceed a manual grading of 3 (on a scale from 1 to 5) or an automatic (ε(T)) grading of 1.2. Automatic and manual grading provide comparable quality control, but the advantage of the automated technique is its ability to provide a motion value at scan time (providing a basis for real time decision regarding re-scan requirements), and the assessment is objective. Notably, automatic motion measurement can be performed retrospectively based on original scan data, and is therefore well suited for multi-center studies as well as any research where objective quality control is paramount.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22445540     DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2012.03.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone        ISSN: 1873-2763            Impact factor:   4.398


  43 in total

1.  Bone micro-architecture of elite alpine skiers is not reflected by bone mineral density.

Authors:  A-M Liphardt; J D Schipilow; H M Macdonald; M Kan; A Zieger; S K Boyd
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-04-25       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Bone quality in osteopenic postmenopausal women is not improved after 12 months of whole-body vibration training.

Authors:  A M Liphardt; J Schipilow; D A Hanley; S K Boyd
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Cortical porosity exhibits accelerated rate of change in peri- compared with post-menopausal women.

Authors:  L A Burt; J L Bhatla; D A Hanley; S K Boyd
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Bone Health in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated by Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass and the Role of Diabetes Remission.

Authors:  Lene Ring Madsen; Rasmus Espersen; Marie Juul Ornstrup; Niklas Rye Jørgensen; Bente Lomholt Langdahl; Bjørn Richelsen
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.129

5.  A Trimodality Comparison of Volumetric Bone Imaging Technologies. Part III: SD, SEE, LSC Association With Fragility Fractures.

Authors:  Andy K O Wong; Karen A Beattie; Kevin K H Min; Zamir Merali; Colin E Webber; Christopher L Gordon; Alexandra Papaioannou; Angela M W Cheung; Jonathan D Adachi
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 2.617

6.  A Trimodality Comparison of Volumetric Bone Imaging Technologies. Part II: 1-Yr Change, Long-Term Precision, and Least Significant Change.

Authors:  Andy K O Wong; Karen A Beattie; Kevin K H Min; Zamir Merali; Colin E Webber; Christopher L Gordon; Alexandra Papaioannou; Angela M W Cheung; Jonathan D Adachi
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 2.617

7.  A trimodality comparison of volumetric bone imaging technologies. Part I: Short-term precision and validity.

Authors:  Andy K O Wong; Karen A Beattie; Kevin K H Min; Colin E Webber; Christopher L Gordon; Alexandra Papaioannou; Angela M W Cheung; Jonathan D Adachi
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 2.617

8.  Heritability and Genetic Correlations for Bone Microarchitecture: The Framingham Study Families.

Authors:  David Karasik; Serkalem Demissie; Yanhua Zhou; Darlene Lu; Kerry E Broe; Mary L Bouxsein; L Adrienne Cupples; Douglas P Kiel
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Bone Strength Estimated by Micro-Finite Element Analysis (µFEA) Is Heritable and Shares Genetic Predisposition With Areal BMD: The Framingham Study.

Authors:  David Karasik; Serkalem Demissie; Darlene Lu; Kerry E Broe; Steven K Boyd; Ching-Ti Liu; Yi-Hsiang Hsu; Mary L Bouxsein; Douglas P Kiel
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Multicenter precision of cortical and trabecular bone quality measures assessed by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography.

Authors:  Andrew J Burghardt; Jean-Baptiste Pialat; Galateia J Kazakia; Stephanie Boutroy; Klaus Engelke; Janina M Patsch; Alexander Valentinitsch; Danmei Liu; Eva Szabo; Cesar E Bogado; Maria Belen Zanchetta; Heather A McKay; Elizabeth Shane; Steven K Boyd; Mary L Bouxsein; Roland Chapurlat; Sundeep Khosla; Sharmila Majumdar
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 6.741

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.