Literature DB >> 8931036

Correlations of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quantitative computed tomography, and single photon absorptiometry with spinal and non-spinal fractures.

F W Lafferty1, D Y Rowland.   

Abstract

Controversy continues as to which method of measuring bone mineral density (BMD) best detects osteoporosis and best correlates with fractures of the spine, hip and elsewhere. To answer these questions the prevalence of fractures was carefully determined among 90 subjects (70 with osteoporosis, 6 with mild primary hyperparathyroidism, 1 with osteomalacia and 13 normals) and simultaneous measurements were made using spinal computed tomography (QCT), spinal anteroposterior (AP) and supine lateral dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), femoral neck and total hip DXA, and distal third radial DXA and single photon absorptiometry (SPA). The DXA measurements which had the greatest sensitivity in detecting osteoporosis (defined as a BMD lower than -2.5 SD of peak bone mass at age 30 years) were the supine lateral spine DXA (84%) and femoral neck DXA (75%); less sensitive were the DXA measurements of the distal third of the radius (61%) and AP spine (51%). DXA measurements of the femoral neck and distal third of the radius were more useful than spinal measurements in detecting the osteopenia of mild primary hyperparathyroidism. Vertebral compression fractures (VCF) correlated well with spinal QCT (r = 0.38) and lateral spine DXA (r = -0.41), but poorly with AP spine DXA (r = -0.17) and distal third radial DXA (r = -0.02). Non-spinal fractures correlated best with the distal third radial DXA (r = -0.42). In conclusion, spinal QCT, supine lateral spine DXA and femoral neck DXA are the best BMD methods to screen for osteoporosis, whereas AP spine DXA is a poor screening method in women over 60 years of age. Spinal QCT and lateral spine DXA correlate well with VCFs, whereas correlations of VCFs with AP spine DXA, femoral neck DXA and distal third radial DXA are poor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8931036     DOI: 10.1007/bf01623015

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


  44 in total

1.  Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry of the forearm: reproducibility and correlation with single-photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  M S Leboff; G E Fuleihan; J E Angell; S Chung; K Curtis
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  A method for selective tissue and bone visualization using dual energy scanned projection radiography.

Authors:  W R Brody; G Butt; A Hall; A Macovski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1981 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of the spine--decubitus lateral versus anteroposterior projection in osteoporotic women: comparison to single energy X-ray absorptiometry of the forearm.

Authors:  K Bjarnason; L Nilas; C Hassager; C Christiansen
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Lateral dual-energy radiography: artifact error from rib and pelvic bone.

Authors:  R C Rupich; M G Griffin; R Pacifici; L V Avioli; N Susman
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 6.741

6.  Usefulness of regional bone measurements in patients with osteoporotic fractures of the spine and distal forearm.

Authors:  L Nilas; J Pødenphant; B J Riis; A Gotfredsen; C Christiansen
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Quantitative computed tomography for prediction of vertebral fracture risk.

Authors:  C E Cann; H K Genant; F O Kolb; B Ettinger
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.398

8.  Dual energy radiography versus quantitative computer tomography for the diagnosis of osteoporosis.

Authors:  R Pacifici; R Rupich; M Griffin; A Chines; N Susman; L V Avioli
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 5.958

9.  Which vertebrae should be assessed using lateral dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  M Jergas; M Breitenseher; C C Glüer; D Black; P Lang; S Grampp; K Engelke; H K Genant
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Distribution of bone mineral density in the lumbar spine in health and osteoporosis.

Authors:  P J Ryan; G M Blake; R Herd; J Parker; I Fogelman
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  9 in total

1.  Bone mineral density & T-scores.

Authors:  R B Mazess
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Densitometric and geometric measurement of the proximal femur in elderly women with and without osteoporotic vertebral fractures by volumetric quantitative multi-slice CT.

Authors:  Sheng-yong Wu; Ji Qi; Ying Lu; Jing Lan; Jin-chao Yu; Lian-qing Wen; Zhuo-li Zhang
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  Bone disease in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: results from a screened population-based study.

Authors:  Sigrun Thorsteinsdottir; Sigrun H Lund; Ebba K Lindqvist; Marianna Thordardottir; Gunnar Sigurdsson; Rene Costello; Debra Burton; Hlif Steingrimsdottir; Vilmundur Gudnason; Gudny Eiriksdottir; Kristin Siggeirsdottir; Tamara B Harris; Ola Landgren; Sigurdur Y Kristinsson
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2017-12-21

4.  Positioner and clothing artifact can affect one-third radius bone mineral density measurement.

Authors:  Diane Krueger; Nellie Vallarta-Ast; Jessie Libber; Mary Checovich; Ronald Gangnon; Neil Binkley
Journal:  J Clin Densitom       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 2.617

5.  Osteoporosis in a female population from Bratislava--age-related BMD changes.

Authors:  Jaroslava Wendlová; Viera Pacáková
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2007

6.  Differences in hip quantitative computed tomography (QCT) measurements of bone mineral density and bone strength between glucocorticoid-treated and glucocorticoid-naive postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Kuo-Chiang Lian; Thomas F Lang; Joyce H Keyak; Gunnard W Modin; Qaisar Rehman; Loi Do; Nancy E Lane
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-28       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Assessment of volumetric bone mineral density of the femoral neck in postmenopausal women with and without vertebral fractures using quantitative multi-slice CT.

Authors:  Sheng-yong Wu; Hui-hui Jia; Didier Hans; Jing Lan; Li-ying Wang; Jing-xue Li; Yue-zeng Cai
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.066

8.  Improved prediction of incident vertebral fractures using opportunistic QCT compared to DXA.

Authors:  Maximilian T Löffler; Alina Jacob; Alexander Valentinitsch; Anna Rienmüller; Claus Zimmer; Yu-Mi Ryang; Thomas Baum; Jan S Kirschke
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-02-21       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Glucocorticoid-induced bone loss is associated with abnormal intravertebral areal bone mineral density distribution.

Authors:  Louise I Manning; Andrew M Briggs; Sharon Van Doornum; Ashwini Kale; Susan Kantor; John D Wark
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 3.257

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.