Julio Carballido-Gamio1, Serena Bonaretti1, Isra Saeed1, Roy Harnish1, Robert Recker1, Andrew J Burghardt1, Joyce H Keyak1, Tamara Harris1, Sundeep Khosla1, Thomas F Lang1. 1. 1 Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA ; 2 Department of Endocrinology, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA ; 3 Department of Radiological Sciences, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Department of Biomedical Engineering, and Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA ; 4 Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, Maryland, USA ; 5 Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism and Nutrition, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) imaging is the basis for multiple assessments of bone quality in the proximal femur, including volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), tissue volume, estimation of bone strength using finite element modeling (FEM), cortical bone thickness, and computational-anatomy-based morphometry assessments. METHODS: Here, we present an automatic framework to perform a multi-parametric QCT quantification of the proximal femur. In this framework, the proximal femur is cropped from the bilateral hip scans, segmented using a multi-atlas based segmentation approach, and then assigned volumes of interest through the registration of a proximal femoral template. The proximal femur is then subjected to compartmental vBMD, compartmental tissue volume, FEM bone strength, compartmental surface-based cortical bone thickness, compartmental surface-based vBMD, local surface-based cortical bone thickness, and local surface-based cortical vBMD computations. Consequently, the template registrations together with vBMD and surface-based cortical bone parametric maps enable computational anatomy studies. The accuracy of the segmentation was validated against manual segmentations of 80 scans from two clinical facilities, while the multi-parametric reproducibility was evaluated using repeat scans with repositioning from 22 subjects obtained on CT imaging systems from two manufacturers. RESULTS: Accuracy results yielded a mean dice similarity coefficient of 0.976±0.006, and a modified Haussdorf distance of 0.219±0.071 mm. Reproducibility of QCT-derived parameters yielded root mean square coefficients of variation (CVRMS) between 0.89-1.66% for compartmental vBMD; 0.20-1.82% for compartmental tissue volume; 3.51-3.59% for FEM bone strength; 1.89-2.69% for compartmental surface-based cortical bone thickness; and 1.08-2.19% for compartmental surface-based cortical vBMD. For local surface-based assessments, mean CVRMS were between 3.45-3.91% and 2.74-3.15% for cortical bone thickness and vBMD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The automatic framework presented here enables accurate and reproducible QCT multi-parametric analyses of the proximal femur. Our subjects were elderly, with scans obtained across multiple clinical sites and manufacturers, thus documenting its value for clinical trials and other multi-site studies.
BACKGROUND: Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) imaging is the basis for multiple assessments of bone quality in the proximal femur, including volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), tissue volume, estimation of bone strength using finite element modeling (FEM), cortical bone thickness, and computational-anatomy-based morphometry assessments. METHODS: Here, we present an automatic framework to perform a multi-parametric QCT quantification of the proximal femur. In this framework, the proximal femur is cropped from the bilateral hip scans, segmented using a multi-atlas based segmentation approach, and then assigned volumes of interest through the registration of a proximal femoral template. The proximal femur is then subjected to compartmental vBMD, compartmental tissue volume, FEM bone strength, compartmental surface-based cortical bone thickness, compartmental surface-based vBMD, local surface-based cortical bone thickness, and local surface-based cortical vBMD computations. Consequently, the template registrations together with vBMD and surface-based cortical bone parametric maps enable computational anatomy studies. The accuracy of the segmentation was validated against manual segmentations of 80 scans from two clinical facilities, while the multi-parametric reproducibility was evaluated using repeat scans with repositioning from 22 subjects obtained on CT imaging systems from two manufacturers. RESULTS: Accuracy results yielded a mean dice similarity coefficient of 0.976±0.006, and a modified Haussdorf distance of 0.219±0.071 mm. Reproducibility of QCT-derived parameters yielded root mean square coefficients of variation (CVRMS) between 0.89-1.66% for compartmental vBMD; 0.20-1.82% for compartmental tissue volume; 3.51-3.59% for FEM bone strength; 1.89-2.69% for compartmental surface-based cortical bone thickness; and 1.08-2.19% for compartmental surface-based cortical vBMD. For local surface-based assessments, mean CVRMS were between 3.45-3.91% and 2.74-3.15% for cortical bone thickness and vBMD, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The automatic framework presented here enables accurate and reproducible QCT multi-parametric analyses of the proximal femur. Our subjects were elderly, with scans obtained across multiple clinical sites and manufacturers, thus documenting its value for clinical trials and other multi-site studies.
Keywords:
Computed tomography (CT); bone mineral density (BMD); finite element modeling (FEM); reproducibility; segmentation; thickness
Authors: Paul M Mayhew; C David Thomas; John G Clement; Nigel Loveridge; Thomas J Beck; William Bonfield; Chris J Burgoyne; Jonathan Reeve Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Jul 9-15 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: R D Carpenter; S Sigurdsson; S Zhao; Y Lu; G Eiriksdottir; G Sigurdsson; B Y Jonsson; S Prevrhal; T B Harris; K Siggeirsdottir; V Guðnason; T F Lang Journal: Bone Date: 2010-12-17 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: T F Lang; S Sigurdsson; G Karlsdottir; D Oskarsdottir; A Sigmarsdottir; J Chengshi; J Kornak; T B Harris; G Sigurdsson; B Y Jonsson; K Siggeirsdottir; G Eiriksdottir; V Gudnason; J H Keyak Journal: Bone Date: 2011-12-10 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Kenneth E S Poole; Graham M Treece; Gerard R Ridgway; Paul M Mayhew; Jan Borggrefe; Andrew H Gee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-01-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Leon Lenchik; Laura Heacock; Ashley A Weaver; Robert D Boutin; Tessa S Cook; Jason Itri; Christopher G Filippi; Rao P Gullapalli; James Lee; Marianna Zagurovskaya; Tara Retson; Kendra Godwin; Joey Nicholson; Ponnada A Narayana Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2019-08-10 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Stuart J Warden; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Keith G Avin; Mariana E Kersh; Robyn K Fuchs; Roland Krug; Ryan J Bice Journal: Bone Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Julio Carballido-Gamio; Serena Bonaretti; Galateia J Kazakia; Sundeep Khosla; Sharmila Majumdar; Thomas F Lang; Andrew J Burghardt Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Julio Carballido-Gamio; Aihong Yu; Ling Wang; Yongbin Su; Andrew J Burghardt; Thomas F Lang; Xiaoguang Cheng Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: J Carballido-Gamio; M Posadzy; P-H Wu; K Kenny; I Saeed; T M Link; P C Tien; R Krug; G J Kazakia Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2022-04-27 Impact factor: 5.071
Authors: Stuart J Warden; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Alyssa M Weatherholt; Joyce H Keyak; Chenxi Yan; Mariana E Kersh; Thomas F Lang; Robyn K Fuchs Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2019-12-30 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Galateia J Kazakia; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Andrew Lai; Lorenzo Nardo; Luca Facchetti; Courtney Pasco; Chiyuan A Zhang; Misung Han; Amanda Hutton Parrott; Phyllis Tien; Roland Krug Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2018-02