A comparison of spinal quantitative computed tomography with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in European women with vertebral and nonvertebral fractures
- First Online:
- 139 Downloads
Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) was compared to dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measured in the lumbar spine of 508 European women defined as normal without fracture (NoF), or osteoporotic (OP), with either vertebral fracture (VF), or peripheral fracture (PF). The correlations between QCT and DXA BMD measurements were significantly different in normal and in osteoporotic patients, indicating that the two exams do not measure the same bone aspects. According to ROC curves results, QCT Z-scores separate OP from NoF with better sensitivity than all other measurements. A threshold to differentiate OP from NoF was chosen at Z-score=−1 for DXA-BMD and −1.5 for QCT-BMD. VF patients showed a highly significant decrease in BMD by DXA or QCT. PF patients revealed measurements lower than those of normal subjects but greater than those of VF, calling into question the idea of a diffuse osteoporosis causing nonvertebral fractures that is measurable by spinal DXA or QCT. DXA is weakly dependent upon age, and T-score or Z-score are equivalent for evaluating osteoporosis. QCT depends greatly upon age, and Z-score appears to be more efficient.
Key wordsQuantitative computed tomography Dual X-ray absorptiometry Osteoporosis Bone mineral density Fracture threshold
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 12.Dequeker J, Pearson J, Reeve J, Henley M, Bright J, Felsenberg D, Kalender W, Laval-Jeantet AM, Ruegsegger P, Adams J, Diaz Curiel M, Fischer M, Galan F, Geusens P, Hyldstrup L, Jaeger P, Kotzki PO, Kroger H, Lips P, Mitchell A, Louis O, Perez Cano R, Pols H, Reid DM, Ribot C, Schneider P, Lunt M (1995) Dual X-Ray absorptiometry — crosscalibration and normative reference ranges for the spine: results of a European Community concerted action. Bone 17:247–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Avouac B, Julien D, Laval-Jeantet AM, Sulman T, Ulmann A, Caulin F (1990) Reproducibility of the reading of radiological spine diformity. In: Christiansen C, Overgaard K (eds) Osteoporosis 1990 Osteopress, Kobenhavn, Denmark, pp 537–569Google Scholar
- 31.Devogelaer JP, Maldague B, Malghem J, Nagant de Deuxchaisnes C (1992) Appendicular and vertebral bone mass in ankylosing spondylitis. A comparison of plain radiographs with single and dual-photon absorptiometry and with quantitative computed tomography. Arthritis Rheum 35:1062–1067CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar