Literature DB >> 23440323

Measurement of phantomless thoracic bone mineral density on coronary artery calcium CT scans acquired with various CT scanner models.

Matthew J Budoff1, Jennifer M Malpeso, Irfan Zeb, Yanlin L Gao, Dong Li, Tae-Young Choi, Christopher A Dailing, Song Shou Mao.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy and precision of thoracic phantomless bone mineral density (BMD) measurements obtained on coronary artery calcium (CAC) computed tomography (CT) scans by using a variety of commercially available CT scanners.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study. A total of 4126 asymptomatic subjects (2022 [49%] men, 2104 [51%] women; mean age, 63.7 years ± 11.8 [standard deviation]) underwent CAC CT with the use of a quantitative CT calibration phantom for evaluation of subclinical atherosclerosis. Two hundred eighty subjects also underwent CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis (C7 through L5). Mean BMD of three consecutive thoracic vertebrae (in the T7-T10 range) was measured in all 4126 subjects. Individual calibration factors for each phantom insert and a general calibration factor for the spine were determined for each CT scanner model. The study population was then divided into three subgroups: All calibration factors were generated from group 1 (n = 1536) and were applied and tested in group 2 (n = 1587), and effects of various image acquisition parameters were assessed in group 3 (n = 1003). Accuracy (bias) and precision of thoracic phantomless BMD measurements across 14 CT scanner models from five manufacturers were determined.
RESULTS: Phantomless BMD values correlated highly with standard phantom-based quantitative CT BMD values (r = 0.987, P < .001). Bias was 3.9% ± 1.4 for phantomless BMD measurements, and the mean coefficient of variation for the general calibration factor was 4.9% ± 2.4.
CONCLUSION: Phantomless BMD can be measured accurately on CAC CT scans acquired with a variety of CT scanners without additional radiation exposure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23440323     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13111987

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


  19 in total

1.  Phantomless calibration of CT scans for measurement of BMD and bone strength-Inter-operator reanalysis precision.

Authors:  David C Lee; Paul F Hoffmann; David L Kopperdahl; Tony M Keaveny
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Quantitative dual-energy CT for phantomless evaluation of cancellous bone mineral density of the vertebral pedicle: correlation with pedicle screw pull-out strength.

Authors:  Julian L Wichmann; Christian Booz; Stefan Wesarg; Ralf W Bauer; J Matthias Kerl; Sebastian Fischer; Thomas Lehnert; Thomas J Vogl; M Fawad Khan; Konstantinos Kafchitsas
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.315

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

4.  The use of routine non density calibrated clinical computed tomography data as a potentially useful screening tool for identifying patients with osteoporosis.

Authors:  Christopher John Burke; Manjiri M Didolkar; Huiman X Barnhart; Emily N Vinson
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2016-10-05

5.  Hounsfield units as predictor for cage subsidence and loss of reduction: following posterior-anterior stabilization in thoracolumbar spine fractures.

Authors:  Bernhard Wilhelm Ullrich; Philipp Schenk; Ulrich J Spiegl; Thomas Mendel; Gunther Olaf Hofmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  Opportunistic Screening for Osteoporosis Using Computed Tomography: State of the Art and Argument for Paradigm Shift.

Authors:  Leon Lenchik; Ashley A Weaver; Robert J Ward; John M Boone; Robert D Boutin
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2018-10-13       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 7.  X-ray-based quantitative osteoporosis imaging at the spine.

Authors:  M T Löffler; N Sollmann; K Mei; A Valentinitsch; P B Noël; J S Kirschke; T Baum
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Productivity loss associated with functional disability in a contemporary small-scale subsistence population.

Authors:  Jonathan Stieglitz; Paul L Hooper; Benjamin C Trumble; Hillard Kaplan; Michael D Gurven
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using thoraco-abdomino-pelvic CT-scan assessing the vertebral density in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Authors:  J Perrier-Cornet; A Y Omorou; M Fauny; D Loeuille; I Chary-Valckenaere
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Bone mineral density values derived from routine lumbar spine multidetector row CT predict osteoporotic vertebral fractures and screw loosening.

Authors:  B J Schwaiger; A S Gersing; T Baum; P B Noël; C Zimmer; J S Bauer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 3.825

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.