The effect of weight and weight change on the long-term precision of spine and hip DXA measurements
- 234 Downloads
We examined the effect of weight and weight change on the long-term precision of spine and hip bone mineral density (BMD) in a group of 64 postmenopausal women studied over a 10-year period. Long-term precision errors were 50% larger than short-term errors. Over the range 50–90-kg weight was associated with a statistically significantly larger precision error when precision was expressed in BMD units, but not when expressed as the coefficient of variation (CV). Weight changes up to 5 kg had little effect on precision.
Reliable knowledge of the precision of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements is important for the interpretation of follow-up dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. In this study, we examined the effect of body weight and change in weight on the long-term precision of spine and hip BMD.
The study population was a group of 64 postmenopausal women enrolled in a 16-year trial of tibolone. We analyzed the spine, femoral neck, and total hip BMD data acquired over a 10-year period on a Hologic QDR4500A densitometer using linear regression to examine the trend of BMD with time for each subject. Precision was expressed in BMD units (g cm−2) (standard error of the estimate, SEE) and also as the coefficient of variation (CV).
The long-term precision errors were in BMD (CV) units: 0.018 g cm−2 (1.9%) for spine, 0.017 g cm−2 (2.3%) for femoral neck, and 0.016 g cm−2 (1.7%) for total hip BMD. An inverse relationship between CV and BMD was found for the spine (P = 0.003) and total hip (P = 0.043) sites, but none between SEE and BMD. For spine BMD, there were statistically significant correlations between SEE and weight (P = 0.025) and body thickness (P = 0.027). For femoral neck BMD, there were correlations between SEE and weight (P = 0.030), body mass index (BMI) (P = 0.023) and thickness (P = 0.021), but no correlations for total hip BMD or when precision was expressed as the CV. When study subjects were grouped in quartiles according to weight, the spine BMD SEE increased from 0.014 g cm−2 for women in the lowest quartile (46–62 kg) to 0.018 g cm−2 for women in the highest quartile (80–105 kg) (P = 0.008). There was a trend for SEE to be greater in individuals with larger weight changes, although these tended to be the heavier subjects.
From the study, we were able to come up with the following conclusions: (1) long-term precision errors were 50% larger than short-term errors, (2) over the range 50 to 90 kg (BMI: 20–35 kg m−2), body weight had a small but statistically significant effect on precision expressed in BMD units, but not when expressed as the CV, and (3) weight changes up to 5 kg had little effect on precision. More studies of individuals >100 kg are required to fully investigate the dependence of DXA scan precision on weight.
KeywordsBody weight Bone mineral density Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry Long-term precision Weight change
Conflicts of interest
- 1.National Osteoporosis Foundation (2010) Clinician’s Guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington DC, USA. Available at: http://www.nof.org/professionals/Clinicians_Guide.htm. Accessed 23 Feb 2010
- 2.Compston J, Cooper A, Cooper C, Francis R, Kanis JA, Marsh D, McCloskey EV, Reid DM, Selby P, Wilkins M; National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) (2009) Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and men from the age of 50 years in the UK. Maturitas 62:105–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD). Official positions 2007. Available at: http://www.iscd.org/Visitors/positions/OP-Index.cfm. Accessed 23 Feb 2010
- 5.Watts NB, Lewiecki EM, Bonnick SL, Laster AJ, Binkley N, Blank RD, Geusens PP, Miller PD, Petak SM, Recker RR, Saag KG, Schousboe J, Siris ES, Bilezikian JP (2009) Clinical value of monitoring BMD in patients treated with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 24:1643–1646PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Welsman J, Knapp K, MacLeod K, Blake G (2009) Obesity increases precision errors in dual energy x-ray absorptiometry measurements. Osteoporos Int 20(Suppl 4):S267–S268Google Scholar
- 19.Cummings SR, Ettinger B, Delmas PD, Kenemans P, Stathopoulos V, Verweij P, Mol-Arts M, Kloosterboer L, Mosca L, Christiansen C, Bilezikian J, Kerzberg EM, Johnson S, Zanchetta J, Grobbee DE, Seifert W, Eastell R, Trial Investigators LIFT (2008) The effects of tibolone in older postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 359:697–708PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Blake GM, Fogelman I (1995) Replacing dual x-ray absorptiometry scanners: cross-calibration of a new multidetector array system. J Bone Miner Res 10(Suppl 1):S267Google Scholar
- 24.QDR for Windows XP Reference manual (2004) Hologic Inc, Bedford, MA, pp 9.21–9.23.Google Scholar
- 25.Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 29.Noon E, Singh S, Cuzick J, Spector TD, Williams FM, Frost ML, Howell A, Harvie M, Eastell R, Coleman RE, Fogelman I, Blake GM (2010) Significant differences in UK and US female bone density reference ranges. Osteoporos Int. 2010 Jan 9. [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar