Literature DB >> 8443695

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

K G Faulkner1, C C Glüer, M Estilo, H K Genant.   

Abstract

In this study, the cross-calibration of a fan beam DXA system (Hologic QDR-2000) to a pencil beam scanner from the same manufacturer (Hologic QDR-1000/W) is described. The scanners were calibrated by the manufacturer using the same anthropomorphic spine phantom at installation. To verify consistent machine calibration, a group of 69 female subjects, aged 46-75, had anteroposterior (AP) spine and proximal femur scans on the QDR-1000/W followed by pencil and array scans of the same sites on the QDR-2000 during the same visit. Many of the subjects had bilateral examinations of the proximal femur for a total of 123 hip scans. Pencil and array area, bone mineral content (BMC), and bone mineral density (BMD) from the QDR-2000 were compared with the values obtained on the QDR-1000/W, and linear regression equations were derived for relating the two instruments. At the spine, no differences were found between the QDR-1000/W BMD values and the QDR-2000 array BMD values. A slight difference between pencil beam modes was detected but was not deemed clinically significant. Linear regression models relating the QDR-2000 and QDR-1000/W AP spine BMD measurements showed correlation coefficients greater than 0.99, with slopes of 1.00, intercepts equivalent to zero, and small root mean square errors. Comparisons at the proximal femur showed equivalency at the femoral neck and trochanter regions for the two machines in pencil mode, but slight increases in BMC and BMD at the other femoral sites on the QDR-2000 in both pencil and array mode. Correlation coefficients were 0.97-0.99 for all measurement regions except for Ward's.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8443695     DOI: 10.1007/bf00308312

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


  3 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  In vivo and in vitro precision for bone density measured by dual-energy X-ray absorption.

Authors:  J Lilley; B G Walters; D A Heath; Z Drolc
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 4.507

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

  3 in total
  14 in total

1.  Measurements of bone mineral density in the lumbar spine and proximal femur using lunar prodigy and the new pencil-beam dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  Dongil Choi; Deog-Yoon Kim; Chung Soo Han; Seonwoo Kim; Hae Sook Bok; Wooseong Huh; Jae-Wook Ko; Sung Hwa Hong
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Hologic QDR 2000 whole-body scans: a comparison of three combinations of scan modes and analysis software.

Authors:  E Spector; A LeBlanc; L Shackelford
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Calcaneal ultrasound attenuation in older African-American and Caucasian-American women.

Authors:  J A Cauley; M E Danielson; E W Gregg; M T Vogt; J Zmuda; D C Bauer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  European semi-anthropomorphic spine phantom for the calibration of bone densitometers: assessment of precision, stability and accuracy. The European Quantitation of Osteoporosis Study Group.

Authors:  J Pearson; J Dequeker; M Henley; J Bright; J Reeve; W Kalender; A M Laval-Jeantet; P Rüegsegger; D Felsenberg; J Adams
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Bone mineral measurements of subchondral and trabecular bone in healthy and osteoporotic rabbits.

Authors:  S Castañeda; R Largo; E Calvo; F Rodríguez-Salvanés; M E Marcos; M Díaz-Curiel; G Herrero-Beaumont
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2005-10-25       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools in postmenopausal women aged 45-64 years.

Authors:  Margaret L Gourlay; William C Miller; Florent Richy; Joanne M Garrett; Laura C Hanson; Jean-Yves Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-11-20       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  The choice of normative pediatric reference database changes spine bone mineral density Z-scores but not the relationship between bone mineral density and prevalent vertebral fractures.

Authors:  Jinhui Ma; Kerry Siminoski; Nathalie Alos; Jacqueline Halton; Josephine Ho; Brian Lentle; MaryAnn Matzinger; Nazih Shenouda; Stephanie Atkinson; Ronald Barr; David A Cabral; Robert Couch; Elizabeth A Cummings; Conrad V Fernandez; Ronald M Grant; Celia Rodd; Anne Marie Sbrocchi; Maya Scharke; Frank Rauch; Leanne M Ward
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 5.958

8.  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.

Authors:  H Franck; M Munz; M Scherrer
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.333

9.  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

10.  Bilateral comparison of femoral bone density and hip axis length from single and fan beam DXA scans.

Authors:  K G Faulkner; H K Genant; M McClung
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 4.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.