Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)
- 1.3k Downloads
Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) with central dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the current “gold standard” for diagnosing osteoporosis and for monitoring patients. Errors in demographic information, improper patient positioning, incorrect scan analysis, and mistakes in interpretation can all lead to a wrong clinical decision or action. This paper reviews the fundamentals of positioning, scan analysis, and interpretation for central DXA and highlights some of the common pitfalls that may lead to erroneous results.
KeywordsBMD Densitometry DXA Osteoporosis
I thank bone density technologists Sally Moody, Angie Buettner, and Terri Schmitter, who provided comments and examples for this manuscript, and other past bone density technologists and colleagues. I have learned an extraordinary amount from my associations with ISCD. I appreciate manufacturers’ input for this paper; thanks to Ken Faulkner and Jeff Franz from GE Medical Systems Lunar, Eric von Stetten and Kevin Wilson from Hologic, and Marc Zimmer and Tom Sanchez from Norland-Cooper Surgical.
- 1.NIH (2000) Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. NIH Consensus Statement 17:1–45Google Scholar
- 8.Hamdy RC, Petak SM, Lenchik L, International Society for Clinical Densitometry Position Development Panel and Scientific Advisory Committee (2002) Which central dual X-ray absorptiometry skeletal sites and regions of interest should be used to determine the diagnosis of osteoporosis? J Clin Densitom 5:S11–S18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Physician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis, 2003. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
- 19.Genant HK, Grampp S, Gluer CC, Faulkner KG, Jergas M, Engelke K et al. (1994) Universal standardization for dual X-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results (see comment). J Bone Miner Res 9:1503–1514Google Scholar