Literature DB >> 28445910

Influence of Contrast Media on Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Measurements from Routine Contrast-Enhanced MDCT Datasets using a Phantom-less BMD Measurement Tool.

Andrea Toelly1, Constanze Bardach1, Michael Weber1, Rui Gong2, Yanbo Lai2, Pei Wang2, Yulin Guo2, Jan Kirschke3, Thomas Baum4, Michael Gruber1.   

Abstract

Aim To evaluate the differences in phantom-less bone mineral density (BMD) measurements in contrast-enhanced routine MDCT scans at different contrast phases, and to develop an algorithm for calculating a reliable BMD value. Materials and Methods 112 postmenopausal women from the age of 40 to 77 years (mean age: 57.31 years; SD 9.61) who underwent a clinically indicated MDCT scan, consisting of an unenhanced, an arterial, and a venous phase, were included. A retrospective analysis of the BMD values of the Th12 to L4 vertebrae in each phase was performed using a commercially available phantom-less measurement tool. Results The mean BMD value in the unenhanced MDCT scans was 79.76 mg/cm³ (SD 31.20), in the arterial phase it was 85.09 mg/cm³ (SD 31.61), and in the venous phase it was 86.18 mg/cm³ (SD 31.30). A significant difference (p < 0.001) was found between BMD values on unenhanced and contrast-enhanced MDCT scans. There was no significant difference between BMD values in the arterial and venous phases (p = 0.228). The following conversion formulas were calculated using linear regression: unenhanced BMD = -2.287 + 0.964 * [arterial BMD value] and -4.517 + 0.978 * [venous BMD value]. The intrarater agreement of BMD measurements was calculated with an intraclass correlation (ICC) of 0.984 and the interobserver reliability was calculated with an ICC of 0.991. Conclusion Phantom-less BMD measurements in contrast-enhanced MDCT scans result in increased mean BMD values, but, with the formulas applied in our study, a reliable BMD value can be calculated. However, the mean BMD values did not differ significantly between the arterial and venous phases. Key points  · BMD can be assessed on routine CT scans using a phantom-less tool.. · i. v. contrast agent significantly elevates BMD values measured on routine CT scans.. · BMD values measured in the arterial and venous phase did not differ significantly.. · Conversion formulas were defined for the calculation of a reliable BMD.. · The phantom-less tool showed good reliability and is a promising method.. Citation Format · Toelly A, Bardach C, Weber M et al. Influence of Contrast Media on Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Measurements from Routine Contrast-Enhanced MDCT Datasets using a Phantom-less BMD Measurement Tool. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2017; 189: 537 - 543. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28445910     DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-102941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rofo        ISSN: 1438-9010


  4 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Phantomless assessment of volumetric bone mineral density using virtual non-contrast images from spectral detector computed tomography.

Authors:  David Zopfs; Simon Lennartz; Charlotte Zaeske; Martin Merkt; Kai Roman Laukamp; Robert Peter Reimer; David Maintz; Jan Borggrefe; Nils Grosse Hokamp
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Bone mineral density measurements in vertebral specimens and phantoms using dual-layer spectral computed tomography.

Authors:  Kai Mei; Benedikt J Schwaiger; Felix K Kopp; Sebastian Ehn; Alexandra S Gersing; Jan S Kirschke; Daniela Muenzel; Alexander A Fingerle; Ernst J Rummeny; Franz Pfeiffer; Thomas Baum; Peter B Noël
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Automatic phantom-less QCT system with high precision of BMD measurement for osteoporosis screening: Technique optimisation and clinical validation.

Authors:  Zhuo-Jie Liu; Cheng Zhang; Chi Ma; Huan Qi; Ze-Hong Yang; Hao-Yu Wu; Ke-Di Yang; Jun-Yu Lin; Tak-Man Wong; Zhao-Yang Li; Chun-Hai Li; Yue Ding
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2022-02-05       Impact factor: 5.191

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.