Optimizing HR-pQCT workflow: a comparison of bias and precision error for quantitative bone analysis
- 34 Downloads
Manual correction of automatically generated contours for high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography can be time consuming and introduces precision error. However, bias related to the automated protocol is unknown. This study provides insight into error bias that is present when using uncorrected contours and inter-operator precision error based on operator training.
High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography workflow includes manually correcting contours generated by the manufacturer’s automated protocol. There is interest in minimizing corrections to save time and reduce precision error; however, bias related to the automated protocol is unknown. This study quantifies error bias when contours are uncorrected and identifies the impact of operator training on bias and precision error.
Forty-five radii and tibiae scans across a representative range of bone density were analyzed using the automated and manually corrected contours of three operators, with training ranging from beginner to expert, and compared with a “ground truth” to estimate bias. Inter-operator precision was measured across operators.
The tibia had greater error bias than the radius when contours were uncorrected, with compartmental bone mineral densities and cortical microarchitecture having greatest biases, which could have significant implications for interpretation of studies using this skeletal site. Bias and precision error were greatest when contours were corrected by the beginner operator; however, when this operator was removed, bias was no longer present and inter-operator precision was between 0.01 and 3.74% for all parameters except cortical porosity.
These findings establish the need for manual correction and provide guidance on operator training needed to maximize workflow efficiency.
KeywordsBone microarchitecture Bone mineral density Endocortical contour Error bias High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography Precision
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
- 3.Dalzell N, Kaptoge S, Morris N, Berthier A, Koller B, Braak L, van Rietbergen B, Reeve J (2009) Bone micro-architecture and determinants of strength in the radius and tibia: age-related changes in a population-based study of normal adults measured with high-resolution pQCT. Osteoporos Int 20:1683–1694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Samelson EJ, Broe KE, Xu H, et al (2019) Cortical and trabecular bone microarchitecture as an independent predictor of incident fracture risk in older women and men in the Bone Microarchitecture International Consortium (BoMIC): a prospective study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 7:34–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Sampaio-Barros MM, Alvarenga JC, Takayama L, Assad APL, Sampaio-Barros PD, Pereira RMR (2019) Distal radius and tibia bone microarchitecture impairment in female patients with diffuse systemic sclerosis. Osteoporos IntGoogle Scholar
- 9.de Waard EAC, Sarodnik C, Pennings A, de Jong JJA, Savelberg HHCM, van Geel T, van der Kallen C, Stehouwer CDA, Schram MT, Schaper N, Dagnelie PC, Geusens PPMM, Koster A, van Rietbergen B, van den Bergh J (2018) Reliability of HR-pQCT derived cortical bone structural parameters when using uncorrected instead of corrected automatically generated endocortical contours in a cross-sectional study: the Maastricht study. Calcif Tissue Int 103:252–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Chiba K, Okazaki N, Kurogi A, Isobe Y, Yonekura A, Tomita M, Osaki M (2018) Precision of second-generation high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography: intra- and intertester reproducibilities and factors involved in the reproducibility of cortical porosity. J Clin Densitom 21:295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar