Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

The usefulness of dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus versus dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of hip and spine in diagnosing manifest osteoporosis.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009 Feb; 129(2):251-7.AO

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a major health problem. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the hip and spine is the worldwide standard in diagnosing osteoporosis. Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) with dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus (Calscan) might be a good alternative. Advantages of the Calscan are that it is quick, widely available and manageable. In this study we compared BMD expressed in T-scores measured by DXA and Calscan. The aim of this study was to define threshold T-scores on the Calscan that could exclude or predict osteoporosis correctly in comparison with DXA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients > or =50 years attending our emergency department with a fracture were offered osteoporosis screening at our fracture and osteoporosis outpatient clinic (FO-Clinic) and enrolled in this study. BMD was measured at the hip and spine using DXA and at the calcaneus using Calscan. A T-score measured by DXA < or =-2 standard deviations (SD) below the reference population was defined as manifest osteoporosis and was the treatment threshold.

RESULTS

During a 10-month study period, 182 patients were screened with both devices. The mean DXA-T-score was -1.63 SD (range -4.9 to 2.1) and Calscan T-score -1.91 SD (range -5.3 to 1.4). There was a significant correlation between both devices (r = 0.47, P < 0.01). Using an upper threshold for the Calscan T-score of -1.3 SD, 47 patients could be classified as non-osteoporotic with 89.3% sensitivity (95% CI 80.0-95.3%). Using a lower threshold for the Calscan T-score of -2.9 SD, 34 patients could be classified by the Calscan as osteoporotic with 90.7% specificity (95% CI 83.5-95.4). The remaining 101 patients could only be correctly classified by DXA-T-scores.

CONCLUSION

Although DXA is the established modality worldwide in measuring BMD it is restricted to specialized centres. Peripheral bone densitometers like the Calscan are widely available. When BMD measurements with DXA were compared to Calscan measurements it was possible to correctly classify 81 of 182 patients based on the Calscan T-score. Of these 81 patients 34 could be classified as manifest osteoporotic and 47 as non-osteoporotic. Therefore the Calscan seems to be a promising technique which might be used as a screening device at a FO-Clinic, especially when DXA is not easily available.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Surgery, Twenteborg Ziekenhuis, Zilvermeeuw 1, 7609 PP Almelo, The Netherlands. g.dklerk@zgt.nlNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18825395

Citation

de Klerk, Gijs, et al. "The Usefulness of Dual Energy X-ray and Laser Absorptiometry of the Calcaneus Versus Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry of Hip and Spine in Diagnosing Manifest Osteoporosis." Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, vol. 129, no. 2, 2009, pp. 251-7.
de Klerk G, van der Velde D, van der Palen J, et al. The usefulness of dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus versus dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of hip and spine in diagnosing manifest osteoporosis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129(2):251-7.
de Klerk, G., van der Velde, D., van der Palen, J., van Bergeijk, L., & Hegeman, J. H. (2009). The usefulness of dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus versus dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of hip and spine in diagnosing manifest osteoporosis. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 129(2), 251-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-008-0755-y
de Klerk G, et al. The Usefulness of Dual Energy X-ray and Laser Absorptiometry of the Calcaneus Versus Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry of Hip and Spine in Diagnosing Manifest Osteoporosis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129(2):251-7. PubMed PMID: 18825395.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - The usefulness of dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus versus dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of hip and spine in diagnosing manifest osteoporosis. AU - de Klerk,Gijs, AU - van der Velde,D, AU - van der Palen,J, AU - van Bergeijk,L, AU - Hegeman,J H, Y1 - 2008/09/30/ PY - 2008/01/02/received PY - 2008/10/1/pubmed PY - 2009/4/21/medline PY - 2008/10/1/entrez SP - 251 EP - 7 JF - Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery JO - Arch Orthop Trauma Surg VL - 129 IS - 2 N2 - INTRODUCTION: Osteoporosis is a major health problem. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the hip and spine is the worldwide standard in diagnosing osteoporosis. Measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) with dual energy X-ray and laser absorptiometry of the calcaneus (Calscan) might be a good alternative. Advantages of the Calscan are that it is quick, widely available and manageable. In this study we compared BMD expressed in T-scores measured by DXA and Calscan. The aim of this study was to define threshold T-scores on the Calscan that could exclude or predict osteoporosis correctly in comparison with DXA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients > or =50 years attending our emergency department with a fracture were offered osteoporosis screening at our fracture and osteoporosis outpatient clinic (FO-Clinic) and enrolled in this study. BMD was measured at the hip and spine using DXA and at the calcaneus using Calscan. A T-score measured by DXA < or =-2 standard deviations (SD) below the reference population was defined as manifest osteoporosis and was the treatment threshold. RESULTS: During a 10-month study period, 182 patients were screened with both devices. The mean DXA-T-score was -1.63 SD (range -4.9 to 2.1) and Calscan T-score -1.91 SD (range -5.3 to 1.4). There was a significant correlation between both devices (r = 0.47, P < 0.01). Using an upper threshold for the Calscan T-score of -1.3 SD, 47 patients could be classified as non-osteoporotic with 89.3% sensitivity (95% CI 80.0-95.3%). Using a lower threshold for the Calscan T-score of -2.9 SD, 34 patients could be classified by the Calscan as osteoporotic with 90.7% specificity (95% CI 83.5-95.4). The remaining 101 patients could only be correctly classified by DXA-T-scores. CONCLUSION: Although DXA is the established modality worldwide in measuring BMD it is restricted to specialized centres. Peripheral bone densitometers like the Calscan are widely available. When BMD measurements with DXA were compared to Calscan measurements it was possible to correctly classify 81 of 182 patients based on the Calscan T-score. Of these 81 patients 34 could be classified as manifest osteoporotic and 47 as non-osteoporotic. Therefore the Calscan seems to be a promising technique which might be used as a screening device at a FO-Clinic, especially when DXA is not easily available. SN - 1434-3916 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18825395/The_usefulness_of_dual_energy_X_ray_and_laser_absorptiometry_of_the_calcaneus_versus_dual_energy_X_ray_absorptiometry_of_hip_and_spine_in_diagnosing_manifest_osteoporosis_ L2 - https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-008-0755-y DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -