Literature DB >> 8055370

Precision of dual X-ray absorptiometry and peripheral computed tomography using mobile densitometry units.

M Wapniarz1, R Lehmann, O Randerath, S Baedeker, W John, K Klein, B Allolio.   

Abstract

Irrespective of the method used for noninvasive bone mass determination, data comparison between different centers is a major problem as significant interunit variation may occur. We, therefore, have employed mobile densitometry units to reduce interunit variability in two large epidemiologic studies in Germany. Two cars were equipped with either two dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) instruments (QDR 1000 Hologic, USA) (car I) or a special purposed scanner for peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) (XCT 900, Stratec, FRG) (car II). The cars were moved across Germany 11,090 km and 1651 km during the studies over a period of 30 and 7 months, respectively. Precision in vitro was determined using hydroxyapatite phantoms. Forty-eight patients underwent duplicate measurements at the lumbar spine (n = 22) and hip (n = 26) for assessing reproducibility in vivo. Between the two series of scans, the car was moved 63 km. Long-term precision in vitro of the QDR 1000 instruments were 0.41% and 0.59% for BMD with no evidence of machine drift (rate of change per year 0.04% and 0.05%, respectively). Short-term reproducibility in vivo showed a coefficient of variation (cv) of 1.02% for spinal BMD (L2-L4) and 1.72% for femoral neck. Long-term precision in vitro of the pQCT scanner was 0.9%. Our study shows precision in vivo and in vitro and stability of the mobile densitometers similar to that achieved with stationary equipment. In conclusion, mobile densitometry may become a useful tool not only for epidemiologic surveys and clinical trials but also for routine evaluation in less densely populated areas.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8055370     DOI: 10.1007/bf00301682

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


  18 in total

1.  Assessment of spinal and femoral bone density by dual X-ray absorptiometry: comparison of lunar and hologic instruments.

Authors:  N A Pocock; P N Sambrook; T Nguyen; P Kelly; J Freund; J A Eisman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Bone mass measurement by DXA: influence of analysis procedures and interunit variation.

Authors:  C Trevisan; G G Gandolini; P Sibilla; M Penotti; M P Caraceni; S Ortolani
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 6.741

3.  In vitro comparability of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) bone densitometers.

Authors:  M L Rencken; R Murano; B L Drinkwater; C H Chesnut
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  Differential effects of aging and disease on trabecular and compact bone density of the radius.

Authors:  P Rüegsegger; E P Durand; M A Dambacher
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Intersite comparison of the Hologic QDR-1000 dual energy X-ray bone densitometer.

Authors:  G M Blake; C M Tong; I Fogelman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Longitudinal precision of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in a multicenter study. The Nafarelin/Bone Study Group.

Authors:  E S Orwoll; S K Oviatt
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 6.741

7.  Precision and stability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements.

Authors:  J Johnson; B Dawson-Hughes
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.333

Review 8.  Measurement of bone by dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA).

Authors:  R B Mazess; H S Barden
Journal:  Ann Chir Gynaecol       Date:  1988

9.  Comparison of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  H W Wahner; W L Dunn; M L Brown; R L Morin; B L Riggs
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 7.616

10.  Precision of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry: development of quality control rules and their application in longitudinal studies.

Authors:  E S Orwoll; S K Oviatt; J A Biddle
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  6 in total

1.  Implementation of an osteoporosis research program with a mobile dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry unit: the Montana/Wyoming experience.

Authors:  U Ulrich; M Browning; E V Gaffney; K H Schöter; C H Chesnut
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Peripheral QCT for the diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Authors:  M Ito; K Tsurusaki; K Hayashi
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  A study of the long-term precision of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone densitometers and implications for the validity of the least-significant-change calculation.

Authors:  T N Hangartner
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2006-11-30       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Regional analysis of bone mineral density in the distal femur and proximal tibia using peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the rat In vivo.

Authors:  S A Breen; A J Millest; B E Loveday; D Johnstone; J C Waterton
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Radial cortical and trabecular bone densities of men and women standardized with the European Forearm Phantom.

Authors:  J Reeve; H Kröger; J Nijs; J Pearson; D Felsenberg; C Reiners; P Schneider; A Mitchell; P Ruegsegger; C Zander; M Fischer; J Bright; M Henley; M Lunt; J Dequeker
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the lumbar spine in German men and women: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  R Lehmann; M Wapniarz; O Randerath; H M Kvasnicka; W John; M Reincke; S Kutnar; K Klein; B Allolio
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.333

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.