Summary
Repeat spine and femur measurements (5 per case) were done on 19 subjects with the DPX-L densitometer operating at 3 mA giving a radiation flux fourfold higher than the earlier DPX model. The precision for spine bone mineral density (BMD) was about 0.55% (L2–L4) and 0.48% (L1–L4) for 2-minute scans (2.4 mrem). The precision was only slightly lower (0.4–0.5%) for 4-minute scans (5 mrem) in a subset of 11 subjects. There was a slight precision advantage for the larger L1–L4 area compared with L2–L4 for 2-minute scans, but no advantage for 4-minute scans. The precision for femoral neck BMD was 1.00 and 0.85% for 2- and 4-minute scans, respectively, with proper positioning. The corresponding values for the Ward's triangle region of the femur were 2.6 and 1.5%. The precision of spine scans was influenced chiefly by variable region location. The precision of femur scans was affected by both patient positioning and location of the region. The 4-minute scans minimized the number of operator changes necessary for analysis. Precision errors can be reduced by up to 50% with utilization of the higher flux, but this does not obviate the need for care in patient positioning and scan analysis.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sartoris DJ, Resnick D (1989) Dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry for bone densitometry: current status and perspective. AJR 152:241–246
Mazess RB (1990) Bone densitometry of the axial skeleton. Orthop Clin North Am 21(1):51–63
Shipp CC, Berger PS, Deehr MS, Dawson-Hughes B (1988) Precision of dual-photon absorptiometry. Calcif Tissue Int 42:287–292
Wahner HW, Dunn ML, Brown ML, Hauser MF, Morin R (1988) Comparison of quantitative digital radiography (QDR) and dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) for bone mineral measurements of the 1-spine. In: Dequeker J, Geusens P, Wahner H (eds) Bone mineral measurement by photon absorptiometry. Leuven University Press, Leuven, Belgium, pp 419–426
Mazess RB, Collick B, Trempe J, Barden HS, Hanson JA (1989) Performance evaluation of a dual-energy x-ray bone densitometer. Calcif Tissue Int 44:228–232
McClung M, Roberts L (1989) Comparison of precision performance with dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) instruments. Presented at the 7th Intl Workshop on Bone Densitometry, Rancho Mirage, California
Johnson J, Dawson-Hughes B (1991) Precision and stability of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry measurements. Calcif Tissue Int 49:174–178
Lilley J, Walters BG, Heath DA, Drolc Z (1991) In vivo and in vitro precision for bone density measured by dual-energy x-ray absorption. Osteoporosis Int 1:141–146
Blake GM, Tong CM, Fogelman I (1991) Intersite comparison of the Hologic QDR-1000 dual energy x-ray bone densitometer. Br J Radiol 64:440–446
Kelly TL, Slovik DM, Schoenfeld DA, Neer RM (1988) Quantitative digital radiography versus dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 67:839–844
Orwoll ES, Oviatt SK, the Nafarelin/Bone Study Group. Longitudinal precision of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in a multicenter study. J Bone Miner Res 6:191–197
Sorenson JA (1991) Relationship between patient exposure and measurement precision in dual-photon absorptiometry of the spine. Phys Med Biol 36:169–176
Wilson CR, Fogelman I, Blake GM, Rodin A (1991) The effect of positioning on dual energy x-ray bone densitometry of the proximal femur. Bone Miner 13:69–76
Verheij LF, Blokland JAK, Papapoulos SE, Bijvoet OLM, Pauwels EKJ (1991) Automated comparison of dual-photon absorptiometric studies of the lumber spine. J Bone Miner Res 6:575–581
Reid DM, Lanham SA, McDonald AG, Avenell A, Fenner JAK, Boyle IT, Pye D, Nuki G (1990) Speed and comparability of 3 dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer (DXA) models. In: Christiansen C, Overgaard K (ed) Osteoporosis. Osteopress APS, Copenhagen, pp 575–577
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mazess, R., Chesnut, C.H., McClung, M. et al. Enhanced precision with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Calcif Tissue Int 51, 14–17 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00296209
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00296209