Search

Total body (TB) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is increasingly being used to measure body composition in research and clinical settings. This study investigated the effect of body mass index (BMI) and body fat on precision errors for total and regional TB DXA measurements of bone mineral density, fat tissue, and lean tissue using the GE Lunar Prodigy (GE Healthcare, Bedford, UK). One hundred forty-four women with BMI's ranging from 18.5 to 45.9 kg/m(2) were recruited. Participants had duplicate DXA scans of the TB with repositioning between examinations. Participants were divided into 3 groups based on their BMI, and the root mean square standard deviation and the percentage coefficient of variation were calculated for each group. The root mean square standard deviation (percentage coefficient of variation) for the normal (<25 kg/m²; n = 76), overweight (25-30 kg/m²; n = 36), and obese (>30 kg/m²; n = 32) BMI groups, respectively, were total BMD (g/cm(2)): 0.009 (0.77%), 0.009 (0.69%), 0.011 (0.91%); total fat (g): 545 (2.98%), 486 (1.72%), 677 (1.55%); total lean (g): 551 (1.42%), 540 (1.34%), and 781 (1.68%). These results suggest that serial measurements in obese subjects should be treated with caution because the least significant change may be larger than anticipated., (Copyright © 2015 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The T-score discordance among skeletal sites is an important aspect of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements. In the spine, large T-score differences between vertebrae are frequently seen in elderly patients owing to degenerative disease. However, it is unclear how often such differences occur in younger adults with healthy spines. The T-scores for individual lumbar vertebrae were compared for 2391 female singletons (18-79 yr) recruited to the Twins UK Adult Twin Register. Women were divided into 6 age bands and 5 bands by body weight, respectively, and the T-score differences between the pairs of vertebrae were examined using correlation coefficients and the standard error of the estimate (SEE) from linear regression analysis. Correlations between the T-scores for adjacent lumbar vertebrae were r = 0.92 decreasing to r = 0.79 between L1 and L4. When plotted as a function of age, r-values were constant for the 5 younger age bands, but decreased in the oldest group. In contrast, the T-score SEE values increased progressively with age from 0.4 to 0.5 for the younger groups to 0.7 for the oldest. Similar trends were seen when women were divided according to body weight. Both increasing age and higher body weight were statistically significantly associated with a higher T-score SEE. The incidence of large T-score differences between vertebrae varies with age and body weight, but is common even among younger women. Clinically significant T-score differences can occur in the absence of osteoarthritis, and visual assessment of spine DXA scans for evidence of degenerative disease is advised before vertebrae are omitted from scan analyses., (Copyright © 2013 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The precision errors of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements are important for monitoring osteoporosis. This study investigated the effect of body mass index (BMI) on precision errors for lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (NOF), total hip (TH), and total body (TB) bone mineral density using the GE Lunar Prodigy. One hundred two women with BMIs ranging from 18.5 to 45.9 kg/m(2) were recruited. Participants had duplicate DXA scans of the LS, left hip, and TB with repositioning between scans. Participants were divided into 3 groups based on their BMI and the percentage coefficient of variation (%CV) calculated for each group. The %CVs for the normal (<25 kg/m(2)) (n=48), overweight (25-30 kg/m(2)) (n=26), and obese (>30 kg/m(2)) (n=28) BMI groups, respectively, were LS BMD: 0.99%, 1.30%, and 1.68%; NOF BMD: 1.32%, 1.37%, and 2.00%; TH BMD: 0.85%, 0.88%, and 1.06%; TB BMD: 0.66%, 0.73%, and 0.91%. Statistically significant differences in precision error between the normal and obese groups were found for LS (p=0.0006), NOF (p=0.005), and TB BMD (p=0.025). These results suggest that serial measurements in obese subjects should be treated with caution because the least significant change may be larger than anticipated., (Copyright © 2012 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Because osteoporosis is common and usually managed in primary care, there is a requirement for cheap and convenient methods of measuring bone mineral density (BMD). AccuDEXA (Lone Oak Medical Technologies, Doylestown, PA) is a tabletop dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) device that performs BMD measurements of the hand in the middle phalanges of the third finger. The aims of this study were to (1) evaluate the use of AccuDEXA in UK women; (2) investigate the concordance between AccuDEXA T-scores and DXA T-scores for central (spine and hip) sites; (3) investigate the comparative response of AccuDEXA measurements to clinical risk factors for osteoporosis. Measurements of phalangeal and central BMD were performed in 620 women referred by their family doctors for bone densitometry (group 1) and 159 healthy female volunteers (group 2). For 65 women in group 2, aged 39 yr or younger, the mean Z-scores for AccuDEXA and the central sites calculated from US reference ranges were consistent with the expected value of 0, whereas for the 62 group 2 women, aged 50 yr or older, the mean Z-scores for AccuDEXA and the central sites were in the range 0.4-0.7 and were statistically significantly different from 0. In both group 1 and group 2, the AccuDEXA T-scores in older and younger women were systematically higher than those in the central sites by up to 1 unit. Of the 157 women aged 50 yr or older, with osteoporosis, based on their central DXA results, only 34 (22%) had an AccuDEXA T-score less than or equal to -2.5, whereas 76 (48%) had osteopenia and 47 (30%) were normal based on their AccuDEXA T-scores. When assessed by the effect of clinical risk factors on Z-scores, both AccuDEXA and central BMD were affected to a similar extent. We conclude that the conventional World Health Organisation T-score criteria for the diagnosis of osteoporosis should not be applied to AccuDEXA measurements in UK women. Clinical risk factors for low BMD were found to affect AccuDEXA measurements to a similar extent as central BMD measurements. AccuDEXA measurements could, therefore, provide an alternative method for identifying individuals with low bone mass, provided care is taken in interpreting T-scores, perhaps, through the use of device-specific thresholds.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans to measure bone mineral density at the spine and hip have an important role in the evaluation of individuals at risk of osteoporosis, and in helping clinicians advise patients about the appropriate use of antifracture treatment. Compared with alternative bone densitometry techniques, hip and spine DXA examinations have several advantages that include a consensus that bone mineral density results should be interpreted using the World Health Organization T score definition of osteoporosis, a proven ability to predict fracture risk, proven effectiveness at targeting antifracture therapies, and the ability to monitor response to treatment. This review discusses the evidence for these and other clinical aspects of DXA scanning. Particular attention is directed at the new World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) algorithm, which uses clinical risk factors in addition to a hip DXA scan to predict a patient's 10-year probability of suffering an osteoporotic fracture. We also discuss the recently published clinical guidelines that incorporate the FRAX fracture risk assessment in decisions about patient treatment.

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD) have an important role in the evaluation of individuals at risk of osteoporosis, and in helping clinicians advise patients about the appropriate use of anti-fracture treatment. Compared with alternative bone densitometry techniques, hip and spine DXA examinations have a number of advantages that include a consensus that BMD results can be interpreted using the World Health Organisation (WHO) T-score definition of osteoporosis, a proven ability to predict fracture risk, proven effectiveness at targeting anti-fracture therapies, and the ability to monitor response to treatment. This review discusses the evidence for these and other clinical aspects of DXA scanning, including its role in the new WHO algorithm for treating patients on the basis of their individual fracture risk.

Quantitative examination of iliac crest bone biopsies shows that as subjects become older bone and functional marrow are replaced by adipose tissue. Studies of vertebral marrow fat using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS) show that subjects with lower spine T-scores have significantly higher marrow fat content. These findings suggest that the ability of DXA scans to determine fracture risk may be partly explained by the effect of increased marrow fat on BMD. However, a proper evaluation of the relationship between WHO spine T-score status and marrow fat content requires that the BMD data are first corrected for the bias caused by a selection effect in which subjects with higher marrow fat are more likely to be identified as having osteoporosis. In this study we have therefore reanalysed previously published data for 185 elderly Hong Kong Chinese subjects (103 women, mean age 73 y; 82 men, mean age 73 y) who had spine DXA scans and (1)H-MRS measurements of L3 marrow fat. The effect of varying marrow fat on BMD was modelled using vertebral body thicknesses measured in 50 men and women. Spine T-scores in each individual were adjusted for the measured marrow fat. Subjects were assigned to WHO categories based on their corrected T-scores, and the relationship between marrow fat and T-score status evaluated using regression analysis and analysis of variance. The average change in percent marrow fat per T-score unit was used to infer the fraction of the spine BMD fracture discrimination explained by marrow composition. The mean (SD) of the L1-L4 vertebral body thickness was 30.2 (2.1) mm for Hong Kong women and 33.4 (2.5) mm for men. A change in marrow fat content from 0 to 100% was estimated to produce a BMD decrease of 0.14 g/cm(2) (1.3 T-score units) in women and 0.16 g/cm(2) (1.3 T-score units) in men. Although adjusting spine BMD for marrow fat reduced the significance of the correlation, there was still a trend for marrow fat to increase with decreasing T-score with a slope of -1.2+/-0.7% per T-score unit (p=0.078) for women and -1.4+/-0.6% per T-score unit (p=0.023) for men. When the effect of marrow composition on fracture discrimination was evaluated the results showed that the higher vertebral marrow fat content found in osteoporotic subjects made a negligible contribution to the ability of spine BMD measurements to predict fracture risk.

Human height is a highly heritable and complex trait but finding important genes has proven more difficult than expected. One reason might be the composite measure of height which may add heterogeneity and noise. The aim of this study was to conduct a genome-wide linkage scan to identify quantitative trait loci (QTL) for lengths of spine, femur, tibia, humerus and radius. These were investigated as alternative measures for height in a large, population-based twin sample with the potential to find genes underlying bone size and bone diseases. 3,782 normal Caucasian females, 18-80 years old, with whole body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images were used. A novel and reproducible method, linear pixel count (LPC) was used to measure skeletal sizes on DXA images. Intraclass correlations and heritability estimates were calculated for lengths of spine, femur, tibia, humerus and radius on monozygotic (MZ; n = 1,157) and dizygotic (DZ; n = 2,594) twins. A genome-wide linkage scan was performed on 2000 DZ twin subjects. All skeletal sites excluding spine were highly correlated. Intraclass correlations showed results for MZ twins to be significantly higher than DZ twins for all traits. Heritability results were as follows: spine, 66%; femur, 73%; tibia, 65%; humerus, 57%; radius, 68%. Results showed reliable evidence of highly suggestive linkage on chromosome 5 for spine (LOD score = 3.0) and suggestive linkage for femur (LOD score = 2.19) in the regions of 105cM and 155cM respectively. We have shown strong heritability of all skeletal sizes measured in this study and provide preliminary evidence that spine length is linked to the chromosomal region 5q15-5q23.1. Bone size phenotype appears to be more useful than traditional height measures to uncover novel genes. Replication and further fine mapping of this region is ongoing to determine potential genes influencing bone size and diseases affecting bone.

Background: Skeletal ratios and bone lengths are widely used in anthropology and forensic pathology and hip axis length is a useful predictor of fracture. The aim of this study was to show that skeletal ratios, such as length of femur to height, could be accurately measured from a DXA (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry) image., Methods: 90 normal Caucasian females, 18-80 years old, with whole body DXA data were used as subjects. Two methods, linear pixel count (LPC) and reticule and ruler (RET) were used to measure skeletal sizes on DXA images and compared with real clinical measures from 20 subjects and 20 x-rays of the femur and tibia taken in 2003., Results: Although both methods were highly correlated, the LPC inter- and intra-observer error was lower at 1.6% compared to that of RET at 2.3%. Both methods correlated positively with real clinical measures, with LPC having a marginally stronger correlation coefficient (r2 = 0.94; r2 = 0.84; average r2 = 0.89) than RET (r2 = 0.86; r2 = 0.84; average r2 = 0.85) with X-rays and real measures respectively. Also, the time taken to use LPC was half that of RET at 5 minutes per scan., Conclusion: Skeletal ratios can be accurately and precisely measured from DXA total body scan images. The LPC method is easy to use and relatively rapid. This new phenotype will be useful for osteoporosis research for individuals or large-scale epidemiological or genetic studies.

Strontium ranelate is a new orally administered agent for the treatment of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis that reduces the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. This review article examines the evidence for the antifracture efficacy and safety of strontium ranelate treatment and discusses the effect of DXA scans, biochemical markers of bone turnover, and bone histology. In the SOTI trial, three years treatment with strontium ranelate led to a 41% reduction in vertebral fracture risk (relative risk [RR]=0.59; 95% CI: 0.48-0.73; p<0.001), while in the TROPOS study there was a 16% reduction in nonvertebral fractures (RR=0.84; 95% CI 0.702-0.995; p=0.04). Compared with alternative osteoporosis therapies, strontium ranelate treated patients show large increases in BMD coupled with comparatively modest changes in biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone histology. While the large BMD changes provide a useful way of monitoring patients' response to treatment, it is important to appreciate that much of the increase is a purely physical effect due to the increased attenuation of X-ray when some of the calcium in bone is replaced by strontium. Strontium ranelate is a useful addition to the range of antifracture treatments available for treating postmenopausal women with osteoporosis and is the only treatment proven to be effective at preventing both vertebral and nonvertebral fractures in women aged 80 yr and older.

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of spine and hip bone mineral density (BMD) (referred to here as central DXA) have an important role as a clinical tool for the evaluation of individuals at risk of osteoporosis, and in helping clinicians give advice to patients about the appropriate use of antifracture treatment. Compared with alternative bone densitometry techniques such quantitative computed tomography (QCT), peripheral DXA (pDXA) and quantitative ultrasound (QUS), central DXA has a number of significant advantages that include a consensus that BMD results can be interpreted using the World Health Organization (WHO) T-score definition of osteoporosis, a proven ability to predict fracture risk, and proven effectiveness at targeting antifracture treatments. This review article discusses the evidence for these and other advantages of central DXA, including its role in the new WHO algorithm for treating patients on the basis of individual fracture risk.

The DMS Lexxos is the first cone-beam dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) system capable of performing bone mineral density (BMD) measurements of the spine and hip. By using a two-dimensional (2-D) detector array rather than the linear array used with conventional fan-beam DXA systems, image acquisition time on Lexxos is only 1.5 s. However, the need to correct for the large signal from scattered radiation reaching the detector is a potential source of error in cone-beam DXA. The aim of this clinical evaluation of the Lexxos bone densitometer was to investigate the relative accuracy of cone-beam BMD measurements compared with conventional DXA by performing an in vivo cross-calibration study with an established fan-beam system, the Hologic QDR-4500. Spine (L1-L4) and hip BMD measurements were performed in 135 patients (111 women, 24 men) referred for a bone densitometry examination. Duplicate Lexxos measurements were performed in 27 female patients to evaluate precision. On average, Lexxos spine and femoral neck BMD measurements were 2% lower than those on the QDR-4500, whereas total hip BMD was 5% higher. Larger differences were found for the trochanter and Ward's triangle regions. For all sites, Lexxos BMD measurements showed a strong linear relationship with those measured on the QDR-4500 with correlation coefficients in the range r = 0.95 to 0.97 for the clinically important spine, femoral neck, and total hip regions. The root mean standard error (RMSE) between Lexxos and QDR-4500 BMDs ranged from 0.037 g/cm(2) for the femoral neck to 0.060 g/cm(2) for the spine, whereas Lexxos precision was 1.3% for total hip, 2.0% for femoral neck, and 2.3% for spine BMD. Although for the hip BMD sites the RMSE and precision of Lexxos measurements were similar to studies of pencil-beam and fan-beam DXA systems, the results for the spine were poorer than expected. The findings of this study suggest that Lexxos corrects accurately for the effects of scattered radiation at the detector, but that the precision of spine BMD measurements may be limited by involuntary patient movement between the high and low energy X-ray exposures.

A recent position statement issued by the UK National Osteoporosis Society recommends a triage approach to the use of peripheral dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (pDXA) devices. Patients with a forearm T-score greater than -1 or less than -2.5 are regarded as normal or osteoporotic, respectively, while those with a T-score between -1 and -2.5 are sent for further assessment with spine and hip DXA. We have evaluated the NOS pDXA algorithm by comparing it with the alternative strategies of relying on forearm BMD alone, or performing spine and hip DXA in every patient. The evaluation was carried out using a mathematical model, and the predictions were compared with in vivo data obtained in patients referred for investigation by their general practitioner. In the model the population distribution of spine, hip, and forearm BMD was described by a trivariant Gaussian function. Relative risks of fracture were taken from a meta-analysis. The three strategies were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves in which the percentage of future fracture cases identified was plotted against the percentage of the whole population found to have osteoporosis. ROC curves plotted for the discrimination of hip, vertebral, and Colles fracture risk and the risk of a fracture at any skeletal site were similar for all three strategies, with the curves for the NOS pDXA algorithm nearly identical to those for spine and hip DXA. For the case of hip fracture, vertebral fracture, or a fracture at any site, forearm BMD was slightly inferior to the NOS algorithm, but the reverse was true for Colles fracture. The small difference between the ROC curves suggests that forearm BMD used alone can reproduce clinical decision-making with the NOS pDXA algorithm provided that a T-score threshold of T=-2.1 is used for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, instead of the conventional figure of T=-2.5. Results from the in vivo study were in good agreement with the predictions of the model, although some differences were observed that were explained by inaccuracies in the forearm reference data. We conclude that use of forearm BMD alone with a modified T-score threshold of -2.1 would save the need for spine and hip DXA scans and identify only slightly fewer fracture cases for treatment.

Bone density scans using the technique of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) are widely seen as having an essential role in the evaluation of patients at risk of osteoporosis. DXA scans of the spine and hip are the most useful because fractures at these sites result in the greatest impairment of quality of life. A hip DXA scan is the most reliable way of evaluating hip fracture risk, and the spine is the most sensitive site for monitoring response to treatment. Fundamental to the clinical role of DXA scanning are the findings of epidemiological studies that relate fracture risk to bone mineral density. The results of spine and hip DXA scans are interpreted using the World Health Organisation (WHO) definition of osteoporosis as a T-score less than -2.5. DXA scans are also used in longitudinal studies, both for research studies and for follow-up scans of individual patients. Although the former have an important role in the development of new treatments for osteoporosis, the latter are more controversial and are likely to be less important in the future. There is also interest in the use of smaller, less expensive DXA systems for scanning sites in the peripheral skeleton. However, in general, the results from these devices cannot be interpreted using the WHO definition of osteoporosis, and until there is a consensus over establishing an equivalent threshold, their use is premature.

Over the past decade, bone density scans have assumed an essential role in the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Although dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans of the central skeleton remain widely used, a variety of different types of equipment for measuring peripheral sites is now available. However, the poor correlation between different types of measurement and a lack of consensus on how results from peripheral sites should be interpreted have proved a barrier to the more widespread use of these devices. These issues prompt the following questions: Which technique best identifies patients at risk of fracture? What approaches to scan interpretation ensure the closest agreement among different methods? Does it matter if different patients are selected for treatment on the basis of different techniques? The relative risk (RR)of fracture derived from prospective studies is a key parameter for comparing the clinical value of different techniques. Recent reports confirm the advantages of hip bone mineral density compared with peripheral measurements for predicting hip fracture risk, although for fractures at other sites the differences are inconclusive. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, we show that the guidelines adopted for scan interpretation are of crucial importance for ensuring that the information provided is used effectively. The closest agreement among different techniques is achieved by setting thresholds for peripheral devices that target either the same percentage of the population or the same percentage of future fracture cases as femur DXA. Different methods select different groups of individuals from the total pool of patients who will later sustain a fracture, with the most successful technique being the one with the largest RR value. The emphasis placed by many studies on validating new techniques by studying their correlation with DXA may lead to the clinical value of peripheral devices being underestimated when the key datum is the RR value inferred from prospective fracture studies.

Morphometric X-ray absorptiometry (MXA) has recently been developed to assess vertebral deformity status using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) machines. In contrast to bone densitometry, a vertebral morphometry phantom is not supplied by any machine manufacturer. The aim of this study was to develop a suitable phantom to quantify the accuracy and precision of the vertebral measurement software on three DXA scanners in vitro and to perform a weekly quality control (QC) scan over a 30-month period to evaluate any drift or changes in measurement accuracy over time. The phantom was constructed from Perspex and aluminium to simulate soft tissue and bone, respectively. 13 aluminium rectangles (each 30 mm wide, 25 mm high and 3 mm thick, with edges ("endplates") 6 mm thick) were set into one side of a solid Perspex block to represent the vertebral bodies from the fourth thoracic (T4) to the fourth lumbar (L4). The phantom was scanned on both the Hologic QDR2000plus and the QDR-4500A as well as the Lunar Expert-XL. Three consecutive lateral MXA scans were acquired on the Hologic machines using each of the scan modes available. On the QDR-2000plus, the lateral scan modes available are fast, array and high definition, which are all dual energy modes. These three scan modes are also available on the QDR-4500A, with the addition of a single energy scan mode. Four lateral scans were acquired on the Expert-XL machine using the single scan mode available. Each MXA scan was analysed twice by a trained operator using the standard software supplied by each manufacturer. A QC scan was performed approximately weekly over a 30-month period on only the QDR-4500A machine, and total phantom height was measured from the inferior edge of L4 to the superior edge of T4. Accuracy of "vertebral" height measurement varied between the three DXA machines and between the scan modes available. All underestimated "true" vertebral height by between 0.4% and 8.6%, with the scan modes using finer collimation producing the most accurate results. Repeat analysis precision of vertebral height measurement was best on the QDR-4500A, followed by the Expert-XL, and was poorest on the QDR-2000plus. The QC scans acquired on the QDR-4500A suggested that it was a highly stable machine, little affected by even major repairs. It must be remembered that these in vitro phantom results may not be representative of the true in vivo situation. The MXA phantom appears to be a useful tool for documenting the stability of the mechanical instruments and for checking the long-term consistency of operator precision.

The widespread availability of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) and X-ray absorptiometry densitometers raises the question of whether a combination of QUS and bone mineral density (BMD) measurements could provide a clinically useful method of enhancing the prediction of fracture risk. The aim of this study was to examine whether a combination of axial BMD and calcaneal QUS measurements can enhance fracture discrimination compared with either method alone. The study population consisted of 154 postmenopausal women with a history of atraumatic fracture at the spine, hip or forearm and 221 healthy postmenopausal women with no clinical risk factors for osteoporosis. Subjects had dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of the lumbar spine (LS), femoral neck (FN) and total hip (THIP) and calcaneal broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) and speed of sound (SOS) measurements on the Hologic Sahara (SAH) and Osteometer DTUone (DTU). Z-scores were calculated using the mean and SD obtained from the healthy postmenopausal group. Logistic regression analysis yielded odds ratios for BMD measurements at the LS, FN and THIP of 2.2, 2.2 and 2.3, respectively. The odds ratios obtained for QUS measurements ranged from 2.5 for DTU BUA to 3.3 for SAH SOS. While these odds ratios for QUS measurements were higher than those obtained for BMD measurements, the differences were not statistically significant. When the odds ratios for QUS were adjusted for BMD at the spine and hip, the odds ratios remained significant in all cases indicating that QUS and BMD variables contribute independently to fracture discrimination. When the BMD-adjusted odds ratios were compared with those for QUS alone, they were slightly lower but not significantly so. When the QUS measurements were adjusted for THIP BMD, the odds ratios for QUS tended to be lower than when adjusted for LS and FN BMD. The Z-scores for each of the QUS measurement variables were combined with spine or hip Z-scores. Logistic regression analysis of the QUS and BMD combined Z-scores yielded slightly higher odds ratios of approximately 3.1 (compared with 2.9 obtained for QUS alone) and increases in the area under the curve of approximately 2%. However, these increases were not clinically significant. In conclusion, the combination of axial BMD and calcaneal QUS measurements did not significantly improve fracture discrimination compared with either method alone.

Prevalent vertebral deformities are associated with a substantially increased risk of subsequent vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Knowledge of vertebral fracture status is an important component in the prediction of further fractures in patients with osteoporosis. This study reports a comparison of the quantitative identification of vertebral deformities on morphometric X-ray absorptiometry (MXA) scans and conventional radiographs (MRX) in 161 postmenopausal women (mean age +/- SD, 64 +/- 7.1 years) recruited from patients referred by their family doctor for bone density measurement (n = 119) and osteoporotic subjects with known vertebral deformities attending an osteoporosis clinic (n = 42). Each subject had MXA scans and MRXs of the thoracolumbar spine, to image the vertebrae from T4-L4, at a single visit. The scans and radiographs were analyzed by two trained observers using six points to quantify the shape of each vertebral body. From these points, three vertebral heights were measured: anterior, middle, and posterior. Vertebral deformities were identified using the algorithms proposed by Eastell and by McCloskey. Generally good to excellent agreement (per vertebra, kappa = 0.87-0.93; per subject, kappa = 0.81-0.91) was observed between the two algorithms used for quantitative vertebral deformity identification using MXA or MRX. More moderate agreement (per vertebra, kappa = 0.70-0.79; per subject, kappa = 0.67-0.75) was seen when comparing the same algorithm between MXA and MRX. Agreement between MXA and MRX for the McCloskey algorithm was better than for the Eastell algorithm, largely because of the lower number of false positives produced by the McCloskey methodology. Deformity identification by MXA was limited because of poor image quality, primarily in the upper thoracic spine. One in six MRX deformities were missed by MXA as they occurred in vertebrae not visualized sufficiently for analysis on the MXA scans. Deformity identification was poorer in the upper thoracic spine in analyzable vertebrae with a sensitivity of 50.0% for MXA in terms of MRX using the Eastell algorithm for the vertebral levels T4-T7, compared with 80.6% for L1-L4A. MXA proved to be more effective at identifying moderate to severe MRX deformities producing a sensitivity of 22.0% for MXA in terms of identifying MRX grade 1 deformities using the Eastell algorithm, compared with 81.6% for grade 2 deformities. Although MXA image quality is inferior to that of conventional radiographs, MXA has distinct advantages such as a substantially reduced effective dose to the patient and acquisition of a single image of the spine. MXA is a potentially useful, relatively fast, low-radiation technique to identify prevalent vertebral deformities, particularly moderate to severe deformities in the middle/lower thoracic and lumbar spine, in conjunction with morphometric radiography in some patients.

The accurate identification of prevalent vertebral fractures is important in both the clinical and research setting as they are associated with increased risk of further fracture and irreversible clinical consequences. This study reports a direct comparison of prevalent vertebral deformity identification using X-ray absorptiometry (XA) scans, acquired on a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) machine, and conventional radiographs in a diverse group of 161 postmenopausal women, ranging from healthy subjects with normal bone mineral density (BMD) to osteoporotic subjects with multiple vertebral deformities. Deformities were identified by a trained operator by visual assessment of the XA scans (VXA) and semiquantitatively by an experienced radiologist on the conventional radiographs (XSQ). Subjects were recruited prospectively and were triaged according to their VXA results into normal, equivocal and definite deformity groups. VXA and XSQ demonstrated good agreement (96.3%, K = 0.79) in classifying vertebrae as normal or deformed in the 1978 of 2093 vertebrae deemed analyzable on both the XA scans and conventional radiographs. VXA showed good sensitivity (91.9%) in the identification of moderate/severe XSQ deformities and an excellent negative predictive value (98.0%) was produced when VXA was used to distinguish subjects without vertebral deformities from those with possible or definite deformities on a per subject basis. The majority of disagreement between the two methods resulted from different classification of mild wedge and endplate deformities and the poor visualization of upper thoracic vertebrae on the XA scans. Agreement improved, particularly on a per subject basis, when analysis was restricted to the vertebral levels from L4 to T7. Visual triage of XA scans by a trained operator would seem to be swift, convenient and cost-effective method, with excellent negative predictive value, to distinguish subjects with very low risk of vertebral deformities from those with possible deformities. These 'normal' subjects can then be excluded prior to performing conventional radiographs and further time-consuming and costly methods of vertebral deformity assessment such as XSQ by an experienced radiologist and/or quantitative morphometry. VXA may prove useful in the clinical evaluation of patients at risk of osteoporosis as an adjunct to BMD scans or in the selection of subjects for osteoporosis-related clinical trials.

On radiation safety grounds there is concern about the morbidity attributable to routine radiographs of the spine for the identification of new fractures in large-scale trials of fracture prevention. However, the role of the potentially safer low-radiation-dose technique of vertebral morphometry performed by third generation dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry equipment requires evaluation for use in clinical trials. We have therefore investigated the short-term inter-scan imprecision as well as the imprecision attributable to different-day analyses by the same operator and differences in analyses by different operators. The volunteer subjects were participants in a pilot study for a randomized controlled trial of hormone replacement therapy (Women's International Study of long Duration Oestrogen after Menopause, WISDOM). Each subject had two morphometric X-ray analysis scans separated by 2-4 weeks. Exclusions were women with densitometrically defined osteoporosis, as defined by the WHO criterion, and women with a body mass index exceeding 30.9 kg/m2. On average, the women were 58.7 years of age and had bone mineral density values in the lumbar spine which were about 0.7 SD units higher than a reference US female age-matched population. Scans were assessed from vertebrae T7 through L4. In the study there were no clinically significant differences in performance between the Hologic QDR 4500A and the Lunar Expert XL equipment. Between-scan imprecision was significantly worse than imprecision attributable to reanalysis of the same scan by a different operator or the same operator after an interval. Vertebral level had an effect on measurement uncertainty, especially at the level of the diaphragm and at T7. Coefficients of variation, expressed as percentages of mean values, were better for absolute height measurements than for height ratios, ranging from 1.75% to 3.40% for the three heights measured on three separate machines and from 2.34% to 4.11% for the two height ratios. These results compared favorably with the equivalent figures from a parallel study of morphometry precision undertaken using standard lateral radiographs of the thoracic and lumbar spine (3.1-3.6% and 3.8-3.9%, respectively). We conclude that in trials of prevention therapy in women (or men) selected for not having osteoporosis, low-dose vertebral morphometry using the Hologic 4500A, the Lunar Expert XL or similar equipment is preferable on safety grounds to the classical technique based on standard radiographs, although conventional radiology may still be required in those with prevalent or incident deformities to exclude causes other than osteoporosis. The place of this low-dose technique in trials performed on patients with osteoporosis requires further study.

The reproducibility of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) is an important factor for longitudinal studies. We assessed the long-term precision of posteroanterior lumbar spine, femoral neck and total hip BMD in 40 postmenopausal women who formed the control arm of a clinical trial of tibolone. BMD was measured at 0, 6 and 12 months and thereafter every 12 months up to 7 years. For each subject the trend of BMD with time was analyzed using linear regression. Each residual was expressed as the percentage difference from predicted BMD and the validity of assuming linear change with time was checked using the mean residuals for each visit number. For spine BMD a chi-squared test showed that the mean residuals were not statistically significantly different from zero. Although statistically significant deviations from linearity were found for the femoral neck and total hip sites the weighted root mean square residuals were small compared with the precision errors. When residuals were binned into histograms a statistical test for skewness was not significant for all three sites. However, a test for kurtosis yielded a statistically significant result for each histogram due to outlying residuals. To determine the standard deviation (SD) of the core gaussian distribution, outliers were trimmed using the method of Melton et al. For lumbar spine BMD outliers with residuals exceeding +/- 3 SD arose mainly from subjects with a body mass index (BMI) >28 kg/m(2) or from subjects who had undergone a large change in BMI during the study. For femoral neck BMD and total hip BMD the outliers were frequently due to inconsistent rotation of the hip. Results for long-term precision calculated from the standard deviation of residuals using the trimmed (untrimmed) data were: lumbar spine BMD, 1.12% (1.65%); femoral neck BMD, 2.21% (2.48%); and total hip BMD, 1.32% (1.57%). These errors were only slightly worse than short-term errors despite changes of DXA scanner during the course of the study. However, obesity may have an adverse effect on precision errors in individual patients and particular care is necessary to ensure reproducible patient positioning for femur scans.

Although peripheral dual X-ray absorptiometry (pDXA) scanners for measuring bone mineral density (BMD) in the forearm are known to produce an exceptionally low radiation dose to the patient, quantitative assessment of patient dose from pDXA procedures is important for reassuring patients about their safety. We have estimated the effective dose of radiation (ICRP-60) to the patient and also the scattered dose to the operator from a forearm BMD examination performed on a DTX-200 pDXA system (Osteometer Meditech, Hoersholm, Denmark). Measurements were performed using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) attached to the forearm phantom supplied by the manufacturer. The effective dose to a patient was estimated to be 0.1 microSv. At a distance of 1 m from the center of the forearm, the time-averaged scattered dose to the operator assuming scanning five patients per hour was measured to be <0.1 microSv/h. The dose rate over the outside surface of the DTX-200 in line with the primary X-ray beam was measured to be 1.4 microSv/h. These figures compare with a natural background radiation in the United Kingdom of 7 microSv/d. In conclusion the radiation doses from forearm pDXA to both patients and operator were found to be truly trivial.

Since its commercial introduction a decade ago, the technique of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has been widely recognized as a useful and sensitive method of measuring changes in bone mineral density (BMD) at selected sites in the skeleton such as the spine and proximal femur. Because of their high precision and stable calibration, DXA scanners are frequently used in clinical trials to evaluate new treatments for osteoporosis. Quality assurance procedures based on regular scanning of phantoms are widely adopted in such trials, and continuity of the phantom BMD measurements is generally believed to ensure continuity in the in-vivo calibration. We report a change in calibration of a DXA scanner that occurred during a clinical trial where the calibration shift was different for the spine and femur sites and was not predicted or explained by the standard quality control procedures using phantoms. However, we show that provided patients enrolled in studies are thoroughly randomized and the statistical analysis is confined to the differences between the treated and control groups, then the effects of such calibration shifts on conclusions regarding the efficacy of treatment are considerably smaller than the random statistical errors.

Morphometric techniques, which use conventional lateral spine radiographs to quantify vertebral body shape (morphometric radiography, MRX), have proved a useful tool in the identification and evaluation of osteoporotic vertebral deformities. Recently a new method of acquiring the images required for vertebral morphometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanners (morphometric X-ray absorptiometry, MXA) has been developed. In this study we compare repeat analysis precision of vertebral height measurement using MXA and MRX. Twenty-four postmenopausal women were recruited (mean age 67 +/- 5.8 years): 12 normal subjects and 12 with osteoporosis and vertebral deformities. Each subject had a MXA scan and lateral thoracic and lumbar radiographs at a single appointment, which were each analyzed quantitatively in a masked fashion, using a standard 6-point method, twice by one observer and once by a second observer. Anterior (Ha), mid (Hm) and posterior (Hp) vertebral heights were measured and wedge (Ha/Hp) and mid-wedge (Hm/Hp) ratios calculated for each vertebral body. Intra- and interobserver precision were consistently poorer in MXA compared with MRX in both normal subjects and those with vertebral deformities, with MXA CV% generally at least 50% higher than corresponding values for MRX. For both MXA and MRX interobserver precision was clearly poorer than intraobserver precision, a problem associated with any morphometric technique. MXA intra- and interobserver precision were significantly poorer for subjects with vertebral deformities compared with those without, with a CV% for deformity subjects up to twice that of normal subjects. Conversely, MRX showed little or no obvious worsening of intra- or interobserver precision for deformity subjects. Comparison of MXA precision in the normal and deformed vertebrae of the deformity subjects demonstrated that the poorer precision in these subjects compared with normal subjects was the result of increased variability in point placement on the deformed vertebrae themselves. However, the precision for normal vertebrae in these subjects was also somewhat poorer than the precision in normal subjects. We conclude that MXA precision is generally poorer than that of MRX and that the presence of vertebral deformities has a more pronounced effect on MXA precision than on MRX precision.

Over the past decade, growing awareness of the impact of osteoporosis on the elderly population and the availability of new treatments to prevent fractures have stimulated the rapid development of new radiologic techniques to assist in diagnosis. With the ability to perform high precision measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) in the spine and hip, dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is well suited to meet this latter need. However, there is continuing interest in smaller, cheaper systems for assessing the peripheral skeleton that include DXA scanning of the distal forearm and a variety of devices for performing quantitative ultrasound (QUS) measurements on bone. Alongside the new equipment, new guidelines have been developed to assist in the interpretation of bone densitometry studies and, following a report by a World Health Organization working group, osteoporosis is increasingly diagnosed on the basis of the patient's T-score value (difference of BMD from young adult mean normalized to the population SD). For the future, wider provision of bone densitometry services is required to properly target the new treatments now becoming available. Since it is unlikely that conventional DXA can meet these needs, QUS is an attractive alternative, especially because this technique is now proven in its ability to predict fracture risk in the elderly and FDA approval is imminent.

Vertebral fractures are a common and important consequence of osteoporosis and are often identified via morphometric analysis of conventional lateral spine radiographs (morphometric radiography or MRX). A new method of performing vertebral morphometry using images acquired on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanners (morphometric X-ray absorptiometry or MXA) has recently been developed. In this study, we derive reference data for vertebral heights and height ratios using MXA scans as the data source and compare the results with previously published MRX studies. One thousand and nineteen Caucasian women (mean age 63 years, range 33-86) were recruited. An MXA scan, covering 13 vertebrae from L4 to T4, was acquired for each subject on one of four DXA systems located at three centers in the U.K. Analysis of variance found statistically significant but relatively small differences among centers, machines, and scan modes, and therefore data were pooled for reference range calculations. Three vertebral heights (anterior, mid, and posterior) were measured and four ratios (wedge, mid-wedge, and two crush) calculated. These data sets were trimmed using an iterative algorithm to remove extreme values assumed to represent deformed vertebrae, then mean and SD values were calculated using the remaining data. When the data were split by age, a small but statistically significant decrease in vertebral height between the sixth and eighth decades was found, but this was not replicated for the vertebral height ratios. Marked differences were observed between MXA data and MRX, but were comparable to those between different MRX studies. These may result from differences in image quality and point placement protocols, population differences, differences in radiographic technique, and differences in the derivation of a group of "normal" vertebrae. This study suggests that reference data of vertebral dimensions should be specific to the technique which uses those data as a reference, i.e., MXA.

Since its introduction nearly ten years ago, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has become the single most widely used technique for performing bone densitometry studies. One reason for its popularity is the ability of DXA systems to measure bone mineral density (BMD) in the spine and proximal femur, the two most common sites for osteoporotic fractures. Other advantages of DXA include the exceptionally low radiation dose to patients, short scan times, high resolution images, good precision and inherent stability of calibration. For these reasons DXA scans are widely used to diagnose osteoporosis, assist making decisions in treatment, and as a follow-up response to therapy. Another important application has been the use of DXA in many clinical trials of new treatments for osteoporosis. Since the first generation pencil beam DXA systems became available, the most significant technical innovation has been the introduction of fan beam systems with shorter scan times, increased patient throughput, and improved image quality. New clinical applications include the measurement of lateral spine and total body BMD, body composition, and vertebral morphometry. Despite these advances, posteroanterior (PA) spine and proximal femur scans remain the most widely used application because of their utility in treatment decisions and monitoring response to therapy.

Vertebral fractures are one of the most common consequences of osteoporosis. They are usually diagnosed by visual interpretation of lateral radiographs of the lumbar and thoracic spine. Vertebral morphometry, based on measurements of the anterior, middle, and posterior heights of the vertebral bodies from T4 to L4, is a useful adjunct to the visual reading of radiographs. A new generation of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanners offers software for acquiring lateral images of the spine and performing vertebral morphometry analysis. Advantages of DXA morphometry include straightforward and reproducible patient positioning, absence of geometrical distortion of the image, low radiation dose, digital acquisition, and simplified, semi-automated scan analysis. The widespread availability of such DXA systems should make the investigation of vertebral fractures more widely accessible.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is widely used for identifying patients with osteoporosis, making decisions about the commencement of preventive therapy, and following up response to treatment. It is important that radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians issuing clinical reports present clear interpretations that aid the primary care physician in making decisions affecting treatment. This review discusses the principles behind the interpretation of bone mineral density (BMD) studies. After a World Health Organization report published in 1994, osteoporosis is often diagnosed on the basis of the patient's T-score value (difference of BMD from young adult mean normalized to the population SD). T-scores are a measure of current fracture risk. There are problems relating to the use of T-scores in the elderly, and we argue that decisions about treatment are generally best made on the basis of the Z-score value (difference of BMD from age-matched mean normalized to the population SD) because this measures the patient's fracture risk relative to his or her peers. Recent studies confirm that the posteroanterior (PA) projection lumbar spine scan is still the optimum measurement site for monitoring response to treatment. A BMD change of 4.5% is required to register a statistically significant change.

Development of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanners with multidetector array technology has resulted in greatly shortened scanning times. The Hologic QDR-4500 includes an ultrafast (10 s) "turbo" scan mode recommended by the manufacturer for fast screening studies or as an aid to positioning the patient prior to scanning using the normal fast (30 s), medium (1 min) or high definition (2 min) modes. The suitability of the turbo mode for use in routine clinical studies was assessed by examining the concordance of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements obtained in this mode with measurements obtained using the three normal scanning modes. Studies in 151 female patients showed statistically significant discrepancies in four out of the six scan sites studied with systematic differences of 2.9% and 3.1% being observed for the posteroanterior (PA) spine and intertrochanteric region of the hip, respectively. In vivo precision for the 10 s scan found by performing duplicate measurements on 37 patients had a coefficient of variation of 1.3% for PA spine and 2.5% for femoral neck BMD. An investigation of the dependence of precision on body mass index (BMI) shows that the precision of spine and hip BMD was adversely affected with increasing BMI but the trend was statistically significant only in the spine. It was concluded that turbo mode scans are acceptable for routine clinical studies of the spine and hip but should not be used for longitudinal studies or patients with BMI greater than 30 kg m-2.

The introduction of advanced dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanners with fan-beam geometry, improved image definition and faster scan times raises the question as to whether there is a significant radiation dose to the radiographer. We have measured the radiation dose to the operator from studies performed on four DXA systems; the Lunar DPX, Hologic QDR-1000, QDR-2000 plus and QDR-4500. The results were compared with the radiographer dose from 99Tcm-MDP radionuclide bone scanning, where it is not usual to use a radiation barrier between the patient and the operator, and 18F-FDG positron emission tomography (PET) scanning where it is usual to protect staff. Ambient dose equivalent rate averaged over 1 h at 1 m from the patient with the DXA systems working at maximum patient throughput were 0.012, 0.12, 2.1 and 2.4 microSv h-1, respectively, for the DPX, QDR-1000, QDR-2000plus and QDR-4500. Annual operator dose for the DPX and QDR-1000 was well below the 1 mSv limit for members of the public recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) (1990). Results for the QDR-2000plus and QDR-4500 were similar to a radionuclide bone scan (2.2 microSv h-1), but smaller than for a PET scan (8.9 microSv h-1), and were close to the 5 mSv year-1 limit for a supervised area defined in the 1985 Ionising Radiation Regulations. Precautions to reduce radiographer dose with fan beam DXA include placing the operator at least 2 m from the patient, scanning the right hip instead of the left and using scan modes with short scanning times.

We report a study to assess whether supine lateral dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans of the lumbar spine provide better data for monitoring response to treatment than alternative measurement sites such as the posteroanterior (PA) spine, hip and total body. The study population was 152 women enrolled in a placebo-controlled clinical trial of cyclical etidronate therapy. All subjects were 1-10 years after the menopause with bone mineral density (BMD) between 0 and -2 SD of age-matched normal women. Paired PA and lateral spine, left hip and total-body DXA scans were performed at baseline, 1 year and 2 years on a Hologic QDR-2000. One hundred and thirty-one subjects completed the study. Mean percentage change from baseline at 2 years in the treated (n = 61) and control (n = 70) groups was calculated for vertebral body, width-adjusted (WA) vertebral body, mid-vertebral body and WA mid-vertebral body BMD measurement on the lateral scans and compared with the percentage changes in PA spine, femoral neck, trochanter, Ward's triangle and total-body BMD. The long-term precision for each BMD measurement site was obtained by linear regression analysis in subjects taking placebo. Overall treatment effect, defined as the difference in the percentage change in BMD in the two treatment groups at 2 years, was divided by long-term precision to give an index of the ability of each site to monitor response to treatment. Results (and standard errors) normalized to the ratio of treatment effect/ precision for PA spine BMD were as follows: PA spine, 1.00; vertebral body, 0.89 (0.14); WA vertebral body, 0.78 (0.14); mid-vertebral body, 0.65 (0.14); WA mid-vertebral body, 0.60 (0.13); femoral neck, 0.35 (0.15); trochanter, 0.45 (0.15); Ward's triangle, 0.59 (0.22); total body, 0.52 (0.19). Although treatment effect was larger for lateral than for PA spine BMD, this advantage was offset by the greater precision errors. PA spine BMD remains the optimum measurement for longitudinal studies in recently postmenopausal women.

Supine lateral dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has the potential to provide a sensitive and precise method of measuring changes in trabecular bone mass in the lumbar vertebral bodies. An important reason for the improvement in precision compared with the earlier decubitus lateral technique is the use of baseline compensation, an algorithm which computes the changes in lateral bone mineral density (BMD) using data from both anteroposterior (AP) and lateral scans. This report examines the precision of supine lateral DXA based on scans of 12 female volunteers (age range 21-56 years). Five AP/lateral scan pairs were performed on each subject and precision expressed by the coefficient of variation (CV). For the AP scan the CV for both L1-L4 and L2-L4 BMD was 0.8%. Precision of the L2-L4 lateral vertebral body, mid-vertebral and volumetric BMD parameters with (without) the baseline compensation correction were 1.2% (2.1%), 2.4% (3.0%) and 1.5% (2.5%), respectively. Two methods of performing baseline compensation, referred to as the multiplicative and additive algorithms, were compared and the former shown to give significantly better precision. The precisions of different combinations of lumbar vertebrae for the measurement of lateral vertebral body BMD were compared and the precision for L2-L4 shown to be significantly better than for L3-L4. When individual vertebrae were examined L3 had the best precision although the differences with L2 and L4 were not significant. The study confirmed that supine lateral measurements of vertebral body BMD with baseline compensation give better precision than the decubitus method. The improvement makes it feasible to follow patients longitudinally and may allow the sensitivity of the lateral scan to supersede that of AP measurements.

This study compared measurements of BMD using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at three sites in the nondominant forearm (ultradistal, distal one-third and a mid-region between these two), the lumbar spine (L1-L4) and the proximal femur (femoral neck, trochanter and Ward's triangle) for the evaluation of vertebral osteoporosis. Studies were performed on 100 normal women aged 29-69 yr (average 52 yr) and 63 osteoporotic women age 48-75 yr (average 66 yr) using the Hologic QDR-1000. Precision values of < 1% were obtained in both normal and osteoporotic women at both forearm and axial sites. Z-scores for the osteoporotics [Z = (mean BMD normal--mean abnormal)/S.D.] were--2.02 lumbar spine, -1.96 femoral neck, -1.79 ultradistal forearm, -1.73 mid region and -1.66 distal one-third forearm. Receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the lumbar spine and femoral neck equally discriminated between normals and osteoporotics with a 95% area under each curve, significantly greater values than those for the forearm which were 87% ultradistal, 89% mid forearm and 86% distal one-third forearm. Fracture thresholds, defined as the 90th centile of BMD for osteoporotic patients, were 1 S.D. below the normal mean for lumbar spine and femoral neck but equal to the mean for ultradistal, 0.6 S.D. below mean for mid region and 0.3 S.D. below mean for distal one-third region. We conclude that for the discrimination of normals and osteoporotic women the three forearm sites are comparable. However, both lumbar spine and proximal femur BMD are superior to all forearm sites.

Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provides a convenient, non-invasive method of assessing skeletal bone mineral which is widely used for clinical studies. This report describes a study to estimate the effective dose of radiation (ICRP-60 (1990)) to a typical female patient from scans performed on three DXA scanners: the Hologic QDR-1000, QDR-1000/W and QDR-2000. The scans modes studied were: total body; anteroposterior (AP) lumbar spine; lateral lumbar spine; proximal femur; distal forearm. An ionization chamber and tissue-equivalent phantom were used to determine entrance surface dose and percentage depth-dose curves for each scan mode. Anatomical data from ICRP-23 (Reference Man) and a body section atlas were used to estimate the absorbed dose to each organ in the scan fields. Effective dose was estimated using the ICRP-60 tissue weighting factors and the fraction of each organ in the scan field. Results are summarized below. Figures for the effective dose are given both excluding and (in brackets) including the ovaries to cover the cases of postmenopausal and premenopausal women respectively.

The recent introduction of dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) systems with fan beam instead of conventional pencil beam scanning geometry represents a significant technical advance in bone densitometry. This report describes phantom and in-vivo studies of the effect of the change in beam configuration on DXA measurements. Fan beam and pencil beam measurements acquired on one of the new generation scanners, the Hologic QDR-2000, were compared with scans performed on an earlier pencil beam model, the Hologic QDR-1000. The variation with height above the scanning table of fan beam measurements of an anthropomorphic spine phantom were: bone mineral content (BMC): -3.1% cm-1; projected area (AREA): -2.8% cm-1; bone mineral density (BMD): -0.2% cm-1. For pencil beam scans the magnitude of height variation was less than 0.1% cm-1. QDR-2000 fan and pencil beam scan results for 20 volunteers correlated closely with QDR-1000 pencil beam data (r = 0.966-0.998). For BMD measurements on the spine and hip, differences between fan and pencil beam data were consistent with the errors expected from measurement precision. For AREA and BMC data, however, larger differences were observed with individual deviations which correlated with body habitus of the subjects. Although the change from pencil to fan beam geometry significantly affected AREA and BMC data, the effect on the clinically more important BMD measurements was negligibly small.

We report dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) studies of total body bone mineral and body composition performed in 111 normal caucasian women (aged 42-61). Conventional DXA scans of the lumbar spine and femoral neck were also obtained and each woman completed a detailed questionnaire. Significant correlations were found between total body BMD and BMD in the lumbar spine (r = 0.76) and femoral neck (r = 0.72). We present reference range data for BMD in the total body and in seven subregions of the skeleton. Multiple linear regressions of total body BMD and BMC on weight, height and age showed that the inclusion of height compared with weight and age alone was not statistically significant. The dependence of total body BMD on weight and age was: total body BMD (g cm-2) = 1.043 + 0.0042 x weight (kg) - 0.0039 x age (years) (R = 0.46, SEE = 0.074 g cm2). Body mass derived from DXA scans correlated well with weight measured on scales (r = 0.996, SEE = 0.77 kg). Body composition measurements agreed closely with % body fat estimated from skinfold measurements (r = 0.93), body fat mass estimated from a predictive equation based on weight, height and age (r = 0.91) and % body fat estimated from a predictive equation based on body mass index (r = 0.76). Study precision gave coefficients of variation of 0.6% for total body BMD and 0.7% for % body fat.

Bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, trochanteric region, and Ward's triangle was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in 118 women with osteoporotic vertebral collapse (average age 65 years), divided into four groups according to numbers and SD of vertebral deformation below norms: group 1: -3SD deformations only; group 2: one -4SD deformation; group 3: two-four -4SD deformations; and group 4: 5 or more -4SD deformations. There were no significant differences between the groups. Results were compared with those from 80 premenopausal (average age 32 years, range 20-40 years) and 109 postmenopausal normal women (average age 64, range 60-70 years). Mean BMD in osteoporotic group 1 was lower than premenopausal normal women by 32% at the lumbar spine, 31% femoral neck, 30% trochanteric region, and 44% at Ward's triangle, and postmenopausal controls by 17% lumbar spine, 16% femoral neck, 17% trochanter, and 14% Ward's triangle. There was a clear trend to reduction in mean BMD between osteoporotic groups 1 and 4 at all four measured sites with significant differences at the spine of 0.102 g/cm2 (P < 0.01) and Ward's triangle 0.059 g/cm2 (P < 0.01). When compared with premenopausal controls, there was a reduction in mean BMD between osteoporotic groups 1 and 4 of 10% at the lumbar spine, 7% femoral neck, 8% trochanteric region, and 13% Ward's triangle. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed no significant differences in diagnostic sensitivities among the four measured sites for vertebral fractures. We conclude from this cross-sectional data that the majority of bone loss in spinal osteoporosis occurs before the onset of fractures.

X-ray tubes have superseded radionuclide sources for dual photon absorptiometry of the spine and hip. However, the use of a polyenergetic spectrum is a potential source of error for x-ray absorptiometers since beam hardening may result in a nonlinear measurement scale for bone mineral density (BMD). A quantitative study of the effects of beam hardening on measurements made with a commercial dual energy x-ray scanner has been performed. Bone was represented by layers of aluminum of linearly increasing thickness which were scanned under water thicknesses ranging from 0 to 25 cm to represent different body thicknesses of soft tissue. Beam hardening had two effects on measured BMD: (i) at a constant true BMD, measured BMD varied with water thickness; (ii) at a constant water thickness, the BMD scale was not precisely linear. For conditions appropriate to spine and hip studies (BMD) values in the range 0.7 to 1.4 g/cm2 and body thickness between 15 and 25 cm) the maximum deviation of measured BMD from a linear scale was 0.023 g/cm2, while the root-mean-square deviation (0.01 g/cm2) was comparable to the measurement precision for a spine or femoral neck scan (about 1%). The largest departures from linearity were found to occur at the thinnest water thicknesses for BMD values in the range 0.2 to 0.6 g/cm2. The effect of scale nonlinearity on the results of longitudinal studies was examined: for a spine scan at 20-cm body thickness, measured changes in BMD slightly overestimated the true change and implied an error of 0.15%/year for a measurement of a true rate of loss of 3% year in a postmenopausal woman.

We report the results of forearm measurements, without the use of a water bath, using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) in 100 normal women aged 29-69 years (average age, 52 years). Studies were performed using the Hologic QDR-1000, with bone mineral density (BMD) measured at three sites in the non-dominant forearm: ultradistal, distal one-third and a region between these two. The precision of the technique was 0.74%, 0.55% and 0.58%, respectively. The normal range for forearm BMD and variation with age was established. BMD was also measured in the lumbar spine (L1-L4) and femoral neck. Linear regression analysis gave a range of correlation coefficients between forearm and axial sites of r = 0.49-0.67. Standard errors of the estimate (SEE) in predicting axial from peripheral measurements gave average values from the three forearm sites of 0.085 g/cm2 for the femoral neck and 0.118 g/cm2 for the spine. Forearm measurements using DEXA can now be reliably performed in air. DEXA produces a high-resolution image, is fast and simple to perform, and enables both cortical and trabecular sites to be examined in one measurement. Forearm and axial measurements can be performed using the same equipment, where centres possess a suitable DEXA system.

Unlabelled: We have compared results from 13 Hologic QDR-1000 bone densitometers: (i) by performing spine and hip scans on two normal volunteers; (ii) by acquiring sets of 10 sequential scans on a Hologic anthropomorphic spine phantom. For each QDR-1000 site visited a set of spine phantom scans was also acquired on a QDR-1000 at Guy's Hospital to serve as a control study. All scans were analysed using the Hologic scan comparison software. Radiographers at each site were asked to perform their own independent analysis of the scans of the two volunteers. The precision of the bone mineral density (BMD), bone mineral content (BMC) and projected area (Area) results for a set of 10 phantom scans was 0.11%, 0.14% and 0.12% respectively. The coefficient of variation (CV) between sites for the sets of phantom scans was 0.58% for BMD, 0.71% for BMC and 0.35% for Area. In comparison, CVs for the phantom scans acquired on a single QDR-1000 were 0.23%, 0.23% and 0.09% respectively. The CV for the BMD results on the two volunteers obtained using the scan comparison software averaged 1.4% for the spine and 2.1% for the femoral neck. The CV for the results obtained by site radiographers averaged 2.2% for the spine and 3.7% for the femoral neck. Significant differences in the technique used for hip analysis were found., Conclusions: (i) differences in calibration between systems were generally less than 1%; (ii) variations in results resulting from differences in analytical technique were more significant than those resulting from differences in calibration.