Osteoporosis International

, Volume 20, Issue 9, pp 1539–1545

Comparison of QCT-derived and DXA-derived areal bone mineral density and T scores

  • B. C. C. Khoo
  • K. Brown
  • C. Cann
  • K. Zhu
  • S. Henzell
  • V. Low
  • S. Gustafsson
  • R. I. Price
  • R. L. Prince
Original Article

Abstract

Summary

Two-dimensional areal bone mineral density (aBMD) of the proximal femur measured by three-dimensional quantitative computed tomography (QCT) in 91 elderly women was compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) aBMD results measured in the same patients. The measurements were highly correlated, though QCT aBMD values were marginally lower in absolute units. Transformation of the QCT aBMD values to T score values using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) DXA-derived reference data improved agreement and clinical utility.

Introduction

World Health Organization guidelines promulgate aBMD (g cm−2) measurement of the proximal femur for the diagnosis of bone fragility. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in QCT to facilitate understanding of three-dimensional bone structure and strength.

Objective

To assist in comparison of QCT-derived data with DXA aBMD results, a technique for deriving aBMD from QCT measurements has been developed.

Methods

To test the validity of the QCT method, 91 elderly females were scanned on both DXA and CT scanners. QCT-derived DXA equivalent aBMD (QCTDXA aBMD) was calculated using CTXA Hip™ software (Mindways Software Inc., Austin, TX, USA) and compared to DXA-derived aBMD results.

Results

Test retest analysis indicated lower root mean square (RMS) errors for CTXA; F test between CTXA and DXA was significantly different at femoral neck (FN) and trochanter (TR) (p < 0.05). QCT underestimates DXA values by 0.02 ± 0.05 g cm−2 (total hip, TH), 0.01 ± 0.04 g cm−2 (FN), 0.03 ± 0.07 g cm−2 (inter-trochanter, IT), and 0.02 ± 0.05 g cm−2 (TR). The RMS errors (standard error of estimate) between QCT and DXA T scores for TH, FN, IT, and TR were 0.36, 0.40, 0.39, and 0.49, respectively.

Conclusions

This study shows that results from QCT aBMD appropriately adjusted can be evaluated against NHANES reference data to diagnose osteoporosis.

Keywords

Areal bone mineral density Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry Femoral neck Proximal femur Quantitative computer tomography Total hip T scores 

References

  1. 1.
    Kanis JA, Gluer CC (2000) An update on the diagnosis and assessment of osteoporosis with densitometry. Committee of Scientific Advisors, International Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporosis Int 11:192–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tucker G, Metcalfe A, Pearce C et al (2007) The importance of calculating absolute rather than relative fracture risk. Bone 41(6):937–941PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lang TF, Keyak JH, Heitz MW et al (1997) Volumetric quantitative computed tomography of the proximal femur: precision and relation to bone strength. Bone 21:101–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mayhew PM, Thomas CD, Clement JG et al (2005) Relation between age, femoral neck cortical stability, and hip fracture risk. Lancet 366(9480):129–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Prince RL, Devine A, Dhaliwal SS et al (2006) Effects of calcium supplementation on clinical fracture and bone structure: results of a 5-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in elderly women. Arch Intern Med 166(8):869–875PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cann CE, Genant HK (1980) Precise measurement of vertebral mineral content using computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 4:493–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khoo BCC (2006) Dosimetry assessment for QCT (hip and spine) and 3-D DXA (hip) for Human Rights Ethics Committee (HREC) submission. Internal Report of Department of Medical Technology and Physics, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, NedlandsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Looker AC, Orwoll ES, Johnston CC Jr et al (1997) Prevalence of low femoral bone density in older US adults from NHANES III. J Bone Miner Res 12:1761–1768PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Henzell S, Dhaliwal S, Pontifex R et al (2000) Precision error of fan-beam dual X-ray absorptiometry scans at the spine, hip, and forearm. J Clin Densitom 3(4):359–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Genant HK, Grampp S, Gluer CC et al (1994) Universal standardization for dual X-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration results. J Bone Miner Res 9:1503–1514PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hui SL, Gao S, Zhou XH et al (1997) Universal standardization of bone density measurements: a method with optimal properties for calibration among several instruments. J Bone Miner Res 12:1463–1470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sheperd JA, Fan B, Lu Y et al (2006) Comparison of BMD for prodigy and Delphi spine and femur scans. Osteoporosis Int 17:1303–1308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goodsitt MM (1992) Conversion relations for quantitative CT bone mineral densities measured with solid and liquid calibration standards. Bone and Mineral 19:145–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nurzenski MK, Briffa NK, Price RI et al (2007) Geometric indices of bone strength are associated with physical activity and dietary calcium intake in healthy older women. J Bone Miner Res. 22(3):416–424PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. C. C. Khoo
    • 1
  • K. Brown
    • 2
  • C. Cann
    • 2
  • K. Zhu
    • 3
    • 4
  • S. Henzell
    • 3
  • V. Low
    • 5
  • S. Gustafsson
    • 3
  • R. I. Price
    • 1
  • R. L. Prince
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Medical Technology and PhysicsSir Charles Gairdner HospitalPerthAustralia
  2. 2.Mindways SoftwareAustinUSA
  3. 3.Department of Endocrinology and DiabetesSir Charles Gairdner HospitalPerthWestern Australia
  4. 4.School of Medicine and PharmacologyUniversity of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia
  5. 5.Department of RadiologySir Charles Gairdner HospitalPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations