Literature DB >> 30425005

Lumbar Vertebrae Morphological Analysis and an Additional Approach for Vertebrae Identification in Lumbar Spine DXA Images.

Wenmin Guan1, Wei Yu2, Qiang Lin1, Zaizhu Zhang1, Guiying Du3, Junping Tian1, Ying Xu1, Evelyn Hsieh4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Bone mineral density measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for diagnosis of osteoporosis. However, DXA interpretation can be influenced by analytic errors which can, in turn, interfere with diagnostic accuracy. One such source of potential error is the accurate identification of specific lumbar vertebrae on lumbar spine DXA images. Although the International Society for Clinical Densitometry has introduced several approaches to aid with this process, there remain individuals whose lumbar vertebrae cannot be labeled with certainty using these approaches. We designed the present study to systematically evaluate lumbar spine DXA images among a large cohort of Chinese patients and present an additional simple strategy for identifying L5 named the "em dash"-shaped L5 or "-"-shaped L5, based upon the two-dimensional relationship between the bilateral pedicles with the central spinous process on DXA images.
METHODOLOGY: Lumbar spine posteroanterior DXA images from adult patients receiving care at a large tertiary hospital in Beijing, China from May to August 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. For each patient, data were collected regarding key anatomic features seen on DXA (positions of the most superior portions of the iliac crests, the lowest vertebra with ribs, and the longest transverse processes) and the proportion of patients presenting with "H"-shaped L4 and "-"-shaped L5. Chi-squared analyses were used to compare proportions across age strata.
RESULTS: DXA images from 1125 patients (79.6% female) were evaluated. The mean age of patients was 52.5 ± 14.8 yr (range: 19-90 yr). A horizontal line drawn across the superior-most portions of the iliac crests crossed the disk space between L4 and L5 among 78.3% of patients. The lowest ribs were most frequently (83.9%) observed at T12. Almost 80% of individuals had the longest transverse processes at L3. L4 was predominantly "H"-shaped (73.3%), however we found that the proportion of individuals with "H"-shaped L4 decreased steadily after 50 yr of age (p < 0.001). By contrast we observed that L5 was predominantly "-"-shaped (80.3%), with no significant differences in proportions across all age strata (p = 0.063).
CONCLUSIONS: The "-"-shaped L5 can be incorporated as an additional reference tool for lumbar spine DXA image analysis and may be particularly helpful for lumbar vertebrae identification among patients over 50 yr of age.
Copyright © 2018 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; lumbar spine; morphology; osteoporosis

Year:  2018        PMID: 30425005      PMCID: PMC6520202          DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2018.09.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Densitom        ISSN: 1094-6950            Impact factor:   2.617


  13 in total

1.  Quality in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans.

Authors:  Sarah L Morgan; Ginnie L Prater
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 4.398

2.  Impact of anomalous vertebral segmentation on measurements of bone mineral density.

Authors:  N F Peel; A Johnson; N A Barrington; T W Smith; R Eastell
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 3.  Osteoporosis: a still increasing prevalence.

Authors:  Jean-Yves Reginster; Nansa Burlet
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.398

Review 4.  Consensus of an international panel on the clinical utility of bone mass measurements in the detection of low bone mass in the adult population.

Authors:  P D Miller; S L Bonnick; C J Rosen
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Best Practices for Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Measurement and Reporting: International Society for Clinical Densitometry Guidance.

Authors:  E Michael Lewiecki; Neil Binkley; Sarah L Morgan; Christopher R Shuhart; Bruno Muzzi Camargos; John J Carey; Catherine M Gordon; Lawrence G Jankowski; Joon-Kiong Lee; William D Leslie
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 2.617

6.  Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  D Marshall; O Johnell; H Wedel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18

7.  Variability in DXA Reporting and Other Challenges in Osteoporosis Evaluation.

Authors:  Tiffany Y Kim; Anne L Schafer
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 44.409

8.  Clinician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis.

Authors:  F Cosman; S J de Beur; M S LeBoff; E M Lewiecki; B Tanner; S Randall; R Lindsay
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Osteoporosis associated vertebral fractures-Health economic implications.

Authors:  Julian Joestl; Nikolaus Lang; Adam Bukaty; Thomas M Tiefenboeck; Patrick Platzer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: Pitfalls in measurement and interpretation of bone mineral density.

Authors:  M K Garg; Sandeep Kharb
Journal:  Indian J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.