Literature DB >> 7750022

Evaluation of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone mineral measurement--comparison of a single-beam and fan-beam design: the effect of osteophytic calcification on spine bone mineral density.

H Franck1, M Munz, M Scherrer.   

Abstract

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) using a single-beam (SB) design is a well-established procedure for measuring bone mineral area density (BMD). Recently, fan beam (FB) techniques have become available to measure BMD. We evaluated the QDR1000 and QDR2000 densitometers with regard to precision and cross-compared values using single beam (SB) and FB techniques. To study the effect of osteoarthritic changes on bone measurement (BMC in g) and bone mineral area density (BMD in g/cm2), both parameters were measured in patients with and without osteophytic calcifications (OC) of the lumbar spine. Precision errors for BMD in vitro over 1 and 6 months using the QDR2000 were 0.4% and 0.6% for SB and 0.5% and 0.7% for the three FB modes. For QDR1000 only SB is available. Using this scan mode, the BMD difference (delta = 0.1%) in vitro between QDR1000 and QDR2000 was not significant. The short-term (same day) reproducibility of BMD in vivo was 0.85% for SB mode and 1.1% for FB scan mode (n = 33). The midterm (1 month) precision errors were 0.9% for SB and 1.5% for FB (n = 11). The spine BMD of 751 patients from our outpatient clinic and department of rheumatology was 1.7% lower with FB than with SB (0.878 +/- 0.137 versus 0.888 +/- 0.146 g/cm2). Lower (1.8%) BMD values were also found in the hip with FB compared to SB (0.805 +/- 0.111 versus 0.821 +/- 0.111 g/cm2). There was a highly significant (P < 0.00001) correlation between SB and FB on the spine (r = 0.99) and hip (r = 0.98) using the QDR2000. Correlations found QDR1000 and QDR2000 were lower on the spine (r = 0.97) and hip (r = 0.93).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7750022     DOI: 10.1007/BF00298608

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int        ISSN: 0171-967X            Impact factor:   4.333


  13 in total

1.  Effect of radiographic abnormalities on rate of bone loss from the spine.

Authors:  B Dawson-Hughes; G E Dallal
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 4.333

2.  Lateral dual-photon absorptiometry: a new technique to measure the bone mineral density at the lumbar spine.

Authors:  D Uebelhart; F Duboeuf; P J Meunier; P D Delmas
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  The impact of osteophytic and vascular calcifications on vertebral mineral density measurements in men.

Authors:  E S Orwoll; S K Oviatt; T Mann
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 5.958

4.  Does a single local absorptiometric bone measurement indicate the overall skeletal status? Implications for osteoporosis and osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  A Gotfredsen; B J Riis; C Christiansen; P Rødbro
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Cross-calibration of DXA equipment: upgrading from a Hologic QDR 1000/W to a QDR 2000.

Authors:  K G Faulkner; C C Glüer; M Estilo; H K Genant
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Bone mineral and other bone components in vertebrae evaluated by QCT and MRI.

Authors:  M Ito; K Hayashi; M Uetani; Y Kawahara; M Ohki; M Yamada; H Kitamori; M Noguchi; M Ito
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Relationship of osteophytes to bone mineral density and spinal fracture in men.

Authors:  M Ito; K Hayashi; M Yamada; M Uetani; T Nakamura
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Vertebral bone mineral density measured laterally by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  D O Slosman; R Rizzoli; A Donath; J P Bonjour
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  The predictive value of bone loss for fragility fractures in women: a longitudinal study over 15 years.

Authors:  P Gärdsell; O Johnell; B E Nilsson
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 4.333

10.  Performance evaluation of a dual-energy x-ray bone densitometer.

Authors:  R Mazess; B Collick; J Trempe; H Barden; J Hanson
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 4.333

View more
  6 in total

1.  Risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical outcomes after transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Tiago Amorim-Barbosa; Catarina Pereira; Diogo Catelas; Cláudia Rodrigues; Paulo Costa; Ricardo Rodrigues-Pinto; Pedro Neves
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-08-31

Review 2.  [Bone densitometry in inflammatory rheumatic diseases : Characteristics of the measurement site and disease-specific factors].

Authors:  H Franck; J Braun; F Buttgereit; W Demary; G Hein; J Kekow; G Schett; P M Kern
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.372

3.  Lateral spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone mineral measurement with fan-beam design: effect of osteophytic calcifications on lateral and anteroposterior spine BMD.

Authors:  H Franck; M Munz; M Scherrer; H v Lilienfeld-Toal
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Associations with subregional BMD-measurements in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  H Franck; J Gottwalt
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2008-07-03       Impact factor: 2.631

5.  Peripheral bone density in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Helmut Franck; Jurgen Gottwalt
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 2.980

6.  Comparison of Central and Peripheral Bone Mineral Density Measurements in Postmenopausal Women.

Authors:  Azza M Abdelmohsen
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2017-09-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.