Summary
This study was performed to determine the precision and stability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) measurements, to compare bone mineral density (BMD) of subjects measured by DEXA and radionuclide dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA), and to evaluate different absorber materials for use with an external standard. Short-term precision (% coefficient of variation, CV) was determined in 6 subjects scanned six times each with repositioning, initially and 9 months later. Mean CV was 1.04% for spine and 2.13% for femoral neck BMD; for whole-body measurements in 5 subjects, mean CV was 0.64% for BMD, 2.2% for fat, and 1.05% for lean body mass. Precision of aluminum phantom measurements made over a 9-month period was 0.89% with the phantom in 15.2 cm, 0.88% in 20.3 cm, and 1.42% in 27.9 cm of water. In 51 subjects, BMD by DEXA and DPA was correlated for the spine (r=0.98,P=0.000) and femoral neck (r=0.91,P=0.000). Spine BMD was 4.5% lower and femoral neck BMD 3.1% higher by DEXA than by DPA. An aluminum phantom was scanned repeatedly, in both water and in an oil/water (30∶70) mixture at thicknesses ranging from 15.2 through 27.9 cm. Phantom BMD was lower at 15.2 cm than at higher thicknesses of both water and oil/water (P=0.05, ANOVA). The phantom was scanned repeatedly in 15.2, 20.3, and 27.9 cm of water over a 9 month period. In 15.2 and 20.3 cm of water, phantom BMD did not vary significantly whereas in 27.9 cm of water (equivalent to a human over 30 cm thick), phantom BMD increased 2.3% (P=0.01) over the 9 months.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Mazess RB, Barden HS (1988) Measurement of bone by dualphoton absorptiometry (DPA) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). Ann Chir Gynaecol 77:197–203
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 43:189–191
Mazess RB, Collick B, Trempe J, Barden H, Hanson J (1989) Performance evaluation of a dual-energy X-ray bone densitometer. Calcif Tissue Int 44:228–232
Cullum ID, Ell PJ, Ryder JP (1989) X-ray dual-photon absorptiometry: a new method for the measurement of bone density. Br J Radiol 62:587–592
Slosman DO, Rizzoli R, Donath A, Bonjour J-Ph (1990) Precision of X-ray and Gd-153 bone densitometers at the levels of the spine (frontal and lateral views), femoral neck and shaft (abstract). Calcif Tissue Int 46 (supp 2):142
Nijs J, Geusens P, Dequeker J, Verstraeten A (1988) Reproducibility and intercorrelations of total bone mineral and dissected regional BMC measurements. In: Dequeker JV, Geusens P and Wahner HW (eds) Bone mineral measurements by photon absorptiometry: methodological problems. Leuven University Press, Leuven, Belgium, pp 451–453
Dawson-Hughes B, Deehr MS, Berger PS, Dallal GE, Sadowski LJ (1989) Correction of the effects of source, source strength, and soft-tissue thickness on spine dual-photon absorptiometry measurements. Calcif Tissue Int 44:251–257
Nilas L, Hassager C, Christiansen C (1988) Long-term precision of dual photon absorptiometry in the lumbar spine in clinical settings. Bone Miner 3:305–315
Lindsay R, Fey C, Haboubi A (1987) Dual photon absorptiometry measurements of bone mineral density increase with source life. Calcif Tissue Int 41:293–294
Ross PD, Wasnich RD, Vogel JM (1988) Precision error in dual-photon absorptiometry related to source age. Radiology 166:523–527
Heymsfield SB, Wang J, Heshka S, Kehayias JJ, Pierson RN (1989) Dual-photon absorptiometry: comparison of bone mineral and soft tissue mass measurements in vivo with established methods. Am J Clin Nutr 49:1283–1289
Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Brown ML (1988) Comparison of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine. Mayo Clin Proc 63:1075–1084
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
Strause L, Bracker M, Saltman P, Sartoris D, Kerr E (1989) A comparison of quantitative dual-energy radiographic absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine in postmenopausal women. Calcif Tissue Int 45:288–291
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson, J., Dawson-Hughes, B. Precision and stability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements. Calcif Tissue Int 49, 174–178 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556113
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556113