Literature DB >> 8338975

Influence of patient's weight on dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements of bone mineral density.

P Martin1, M Verhas, C Als, L Geerts, J Paternot, P Bergmann.   

Abstract

Lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) (Hologic QDR 1000) and by 153Gd dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) (Novo Lab 22a) in 120 postmenopausal women. Though a high correlation existed between the two techniques, the ratio between DXA and DPA values was not constant. Using DXA we observed a higher dependence of BMD on weight than in the DPA measurements. To investigate the different behaviour of DXA and DPA machines with weight, we analysed the effects of increasing thickness of soft tissue equivalents on the BMD of the Hologic spine phantom and on the BMD equivalent of an aluminium standard tube. Increasing tissue-equivalent thickness caused the phantom BMD measured by DPA to decrease significantly but had not effect on the DXA measurements. The different behaviour of DPA and DXA equipment with regard to the phantoms could account for the differences observed in the relations between BMD and weight in the patients. Using multiple regression we studied the influence of weight and body mass index on the relation between BMD measured by the two techniques. The introduction of either of these variables into the regression resulted in an improvement of the prediction of the DXA values from the DPA values. However, the residual standard error of the estimate was still higher than the combined precision errors of the two methods, so that no simple relation allows a conversion of BMDDPA into BMDDXA. Our results confirm that BMD is positively correlated with weight in postmenopausal women; the influence of weight on BMD is blunted when the Novo Lab 22a DPA machine is used for measuring bone mineral.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8338975     DOI: 10.1007/bf01623676

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  17 in total

1.  Comparative study of the performances of X-ray and gadolinium 153 bone densitometers at the level of the spine, femoral neck and femoral shaft.

Authors:  D O Slosman; R Rizzoli; B Buchs; F Piana; A Donath; J P Bonjour
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1990

Review 2.  Dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry for bone densitometry: current status and perspective.

Authors:  D J Sartoris; D Resnick
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Comparative assessment of dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy radiography.

Authors:  C C Glüer; P Steiger; R Selvidge; K Elliesen-Kliefoth; C Hayashi; H K Genant
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  Quantitative computed tomography: update 1987.

Authors:  H K Genant; P Steiger; J E Block; C C Glueer; B Ettinger; S T Harris
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  A comparison of quantitative dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  L Strause; M Bracker; P Saltman; D Sartoris; E Kerr
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Errors in longitudinal measurements of bone mineral: effect of source strength in single and dual photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  W L Dunn; S H Kan; H W Wahner
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Dual-photon Gd-153 absorptiometry of bone.

Authors:  H W Wahner; W L Dunn; R B Mazess; M Towsley; R Lindsay; L Markhard; D Dempster
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 8.  Assessment of bone mineral. Part 2.

Authors:  H W Wahner; W L Dunn; B L Riggs
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Does bone measurement on the radius indicate skeletal status? Concise communication.

Authors:  R B Mazess; W W Peppler; R W Chesney; T A Lange; U Lindgren; E Smith
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Quantitative digital radiography versus dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  T L Kelly; D M Slovik; D A Schoenfeld; R M Neer
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 5.958

View more
  2 in total

1.  Bone mineral status in paraplegic patients who do or do not perform standing.

Authors:  S Goemaere; M Van Laere; P De Neve; J M Kaufman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Quantitative ultrasound bone measurements: normal values and comparison with bone mineral density by dual X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  M Moris; A Peretz; R Tjeka; N Negaban; M Wouters; P Bergmann
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.333

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.