Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of dual photon and dual energy X-ray bone densitometers in a clinic setting

  • Articles
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In clinical practice, decisions must be made about whether and how to convert to newer technologies. To address this issue, two separate studies were conducted. We evaluated the relationships between results of lumbar spine measurements using two dual photon absorptiometry (DPA1 and DPA2) instruments and one dual energy X-ray (DXA) instrument with the same subjects (49 volunteers), and also in 65 patients who were measured on the DPA1 and DXA machines. Second, we measured the lumbar spine and the proximal femur in three groups of 12 female volunteers three times on one instrument within 1 week. We purposely simulated a busy clinic setting with different technologists, older radioactive sources, and a heterogeneous patient group. The comparison study indicated a significant difference between the mean bone density values reported by the machines, but the results were highly correlated (R 2 = 0.89–0.96). The short-term precision errors (coefficients of variation) differed among the instruments, ranging from 1.3% (DXA of the spine) to 5.1% (DPA1 of the spine), and in the femoral neck, 2.3% and 2.4% (DXA and DPA1, respectively) versus 3.5% by DPA2. This study emphasizes the differences between instruments, the potential for greater error in busy clinic environments, and the apparent superiority of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry under these less than ideal conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Borders J, Kerr E, Sartoris DJ, Stein JA, Ramos E, Moscona AA, Resnick D (1989) Quantitative dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry of the lumbar spine: in vivo comparison with dual-photon absorptiometry. Radiology 170:129

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Glüer CC, Steiger P, Genant HK (1988) Validity of dual-photon absorptiometry. Radiology 166:574

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Glüer CC, Steiger P, Selvidge R, Elliesen-Kliefoth K, Hayashi C, Genant HK (1990) Comparative assessment of dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy radiography. Radiology 174:223

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gundry CR, Miller CW, Ramos E, Moscona A, Stein JA, Mazess RB, Sartoris DJ, Resnick D (1990) Dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry of the lumbar spine: clinical experience with two different systems. Radiology 174:539

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kelly TL, Slovik DM, Schoenfeld DA, Neer RM (1988) Quantitative digital radiography versus dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 67:839

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mazess RB, Barden HS (1989) Bone densitometry for diagnosis and monitoring osteoporosis. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 191:261

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mazess R, Collick B, Trempe J, Barden H, Hanson J (1989) Performance evaluation of a dual-energy X-ray bone densitometer. Calcif Tissue Int 44:228

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nilas I., Hassager C, Christiansen C (1988) Long-term precision of dual photon absorptiometry in the lumbar spine in clinical settings. Bone Miner 3:305

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. O'Malley M, Kenrick AJ, Sartoris DJ, Hochberg AM, Weisman MH, Ramos E, Zvaifler N, Resnick D (1989) Axial bone density in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison of dual-energy projection radiography and dual-photon absorptiometry. Radiology 170:501

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pacifici R, Rupich R, Vered I, Fischer KC, Griffin M, Susman N, Avioli LV (1988) Dual energy radiography (DER): a preliminary comparative study. Calcif Tissue Int 43:189

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pindyck RS, Rubinfeld DL (1981) Econometric models and economic forecasts. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ross PD, Wasnich RD, Vogel JM (1988) Precision error in dual-photon absorptiometry related to source age. Radiology 166:523

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sartoris DJ, Resnick D (1989) Dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry for bone densitometry: current status and perspective. AJR 152:241

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shipp CC, Berger PS, Deehr MS, Dawson-Hughes B (1988) Precision of dual-photon absorptiometry. Calcif Tissue Int 42:287

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Valkema R, Verheij LF, Blokland JAK, Zwinderman AH, Bijvoet OLM, Papapoulos SE, Pauwels EKJ (1990) Limited precision of lumbar spine dual-photon absorptiometry by variations in the soft-tissue background. J Nucl Med 31:1774

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Verheij LF, Blokland JAK, Papapoulos SE, Bijvoet OLM, Pauwels EKJ (1991) Automated comparison of dual-photon absorptiometric studies of the lumbar spine. J Bone Miner Res 6:575

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Brown ML, Morin RL, Riggs BL (1988) Comparison of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine. Mayo Clin Proc 63:1075

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nelson, D.A., Brown, E.B., Flynn, M.J. et al. Comparison of dual photon and dual energy X-ray bone densitometers in a clinic setting. Skeletal Radiol. 20, 591–595 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01106090

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01106090

Key words

Navigation