M Gruber1, J S Bauer, M Dobritz, A J Beer, P Wolf, K Woertler, E J Rummeny, T Baum. 1. Department of Radiology, Division of Neuroradiology and Musculoskeletal Radiology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria. michael.gruber@meduniwien.ac.at
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the utility of femoral bone mineral density (BMD) measurements in routine contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (ceMDCT) using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the reference standard. METHODS: Forty-one patients (33 women, 8 men) underwent DXA measurement of the proximal femur. Subsequently, transverse sections of routine ceMDCT of these patients were used to measure BMD of the femoral head and femoral neck. The MDCT-to-DXA conversion equations for BMD and T-score were calculated using linear regression analysis. The conversion equations were applied to the MDCT data sets of 382 patients (120 women, 262 men) of whom 74 had osteoporotic fractures. RESULTS: A correlation coefficient of r = 0.84 (P < 0.05) was calculated for BMD(MDCT) values of the femoral head and DXA T-scores of the total proximal femur using the conversion equation T-score = 0.021 × BMD(MDCT) - 5.90. The correlation coefficient for the femoral neck was r = 0.79 (P < 0.05) with the conversion equation T-score = 0.016 × BMD(MDCT) - 4.28. Accordingly, converted T-scores for the femoral neck in patients with versus those without osteoporotic fractures were significantly different (female, -1.83 versus -1.47; male, -1.86 versus -1.47; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: BMD measurements of the proximal femur were computed in routine contrast-enhanced MDCT and converted to DXA T-scores, which adequately differentiated patients with and without osteoporotic fractures.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the utility of femoral bone mineral density (BMD) measurements in routine contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (ceMDCT) using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as the reference standard. METHODS: Forty-one patients (33 women, 8 men) underwent DXA measurement of the proximal femur. Subsequently, transverse sections of routine ceMDCT of these patients were used to measure BMD of the femoral head and femoral neck. The MDCT-to-DXA conversion equations for BMD and T-score were calculated using linear regression analysis. The conversion equations were applied to the MDCT data sets of 382 patients (120 women, 262 men) of whom 74 had osteoporotic fractures. RESULTS: A correlation coefficient of r = 0.84 (P < 0.05) was calculated for BMD(MDCT) values of the femoral head and DXA T-scores of the total proximal femur using the conversion equation T-score = 0.021 × BMD(MDCT) - 5.90. The correlation coefficient for the femoral neck was r = 0.79 (P < 0.05) with the conversion equation T-score = 0.016 × BMD(MDCT) - 4.28. Accordingly, converted T-scores for the femoral neck in patients with versus those without osteoporotic fractures were significantly different (female, -1.83 versus -1.47; male, -1.86 versus -1.47; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: BMD measurements of the proximal femur were computed in routine contrast-enhanced MDCT and converted to DXA T-scores, which adequately differentiated patients with and without osteoporotic fractures.
Authors: E Michael Lewiecki; Catherine M Gordon; Sanford Baim; Mary B Leonard; Nicholas J Bishop; Maria-Luisa Bianchi; Heidi J Kalkwarf; Craig B Langman; Horatio Plotkin; Frank Rauch; Babette S Zemel; Neil Binkley; John P Bilezikian; David L Kendler; Didier B Hans; Stuart Silverman Journal: Bone Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Lídia Sànchez-Riera; Nicholas Wilson; Narainraj Kamalaraj; Joan M Nolla; Cindy Kok; Yang Li; Monique Macara; Rosana Norman; Jian Sheng Chen; Emma U R Smith; Philip N Sambrook; Carmen Santos Hernández; Anthony Woolf; Lyn March Journal: Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.098
Authors: Thomas Baum; Dirk Müller; Martin Dobritz; Petra Wolf; Ernst J Rummeny; Thomas M Link; Jan S Bauer Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2012-04-07 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Steven Boonen; Philippe Autier; Martine Barette; Dirk Vanderschueren; Paul Lips; Patrick Haentjens Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2003-11-07 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: James F Griffith; David K W Yeung; Polly H Tsang; Kai C Choi; Timothy C Y Kwok; Anil T Ahuja; Kwok S Leung; Ping C Leung Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Constantinus F Buckens; Gawein Dijkhuis; Bart de Keizer; Harald J Verhaar; Pim A de Jong Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-01-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Esther Pompe; Martin J Willemink; Gawein R Dijkhuis; Harald J J Verhaar; Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Pim A de Jong Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Daniel L Christensen; Kyle E Nappo; Jared A Wolfe; Sean M Wade; Daniel I Brooks; Benjamin K Potter; Jonathan A Forsberg; Scott M Tintle Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Hans Liebl; Eduardo Grande Garcia; Fabian Holzner; Peter B Noel; Rainer Burgkart; Ernst J Rummeny; Thomas Baum; Jan S Bauer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-02-27 Impact factor: 3.240