Skip to main content
Log in

Performance evaluation of a dual-energy X-ray bone densitometer

  • Rapid Communication
  • Published:
Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

We tested a dual-energy bone densitometer (LUNAR DPX) that uses a stable x-ray generator and a K-edge filter to achieve the two energy levels. A conventional scintillation detector in pulse-counting mode was used together with a gain stabilizer. The densitometer normally performs spine and femur scans in about 6 minutes and 3 minutes, respectively, with adequate spatial resolution (1.2×1.2mm). Total body scans take either 10 minutes or 20 minutes. The long-term (6 months, n=195) precision of repeat measurement on an 18-cm thick spine phantom was 0.6% at the medium speed. Precision errorin vivo was about 0.6, 0.9 and 1.5% for spine scans (L2-L4) at slow, medium and fast speeds, while the error was 1.2 and 1.5 to 2.0%, respectively, for femur scans at slow and medium speed. The precision of total body bone density was 0.5%in vitro andin vivo. The response to increasing amounts of calcium hydroxyapatite was linear (r=0.99). The densitometer accurately indicated (within 1%) the actual amount of hydroxyapatite after correction for physiological amounts of marrow fat. The measured area corresponded exactly (within 0.5%) to that of known annuli and to the radiographic area of spine phantoms. There was no significant effect of tissue thickness on mass, area, or areal density (BMD) between 10 and 24cm of water. The BMD values for both spine and femurin vivo correlated highly (r=0.98, SEE=.03 g/cm2) with those obtained using conventional153Gd DPA. Similarly, total body BMD correlated highly (r=0.96, SEE=.02g/cm2) with DPA results.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Jacobson B. X-ray spectrophotometryin vivo.Am J Roentgen. 91:202–210; 1964.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gustafsson L, Jacobson B, Kusoffsky L. X-ray spectrophotometry for bone-mineral determinations.Med and Biol Engin 12:113–118; 1974.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Reiss KH, Killig K, Schuster W. Dual photon x-ray beam applications. In:International Conference on Bone Mineral Measurement. RB Mazess (ed), Chicago, Il, Oct. 12–13, 1973, pp. 80–87.

  4. Pacifici R, Rupich R, Vered I, Fischer KC, Griffin M, Susman N, Avioli LV. Dual energy radiography (DER): A preliminary comparative study.Calcif Tissue Int 43:189–191; 1988.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wahner HW, Dunn ML, Brown ML, Hauser MF, Morin R. Comparison of Quantitative digital radiography (QDR) and dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) for bone mineral measurements of the L-spine. In:Bone Mineral Measurement by Photon Absorptiometry., J Dequeker, P Geusens, H Wahner (ed), Leuven University Press, pp 419–426, 1988.

  6. Kelly TL, Slovik DM, Schoenfeld DA, Neer RM. Quantitative digital radiography versus dual photon absorptiometry of the lumbar spine.J Clin Endocrinol Metab 67:839–844; 1988.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schaadt O, Bohr H. Bone mineral by dual photon absorptiometry. Accuracy precision sites of measurements. In:Non-Invasive Bone Measurements Methodological Problems, J Dequeker and CC Johnston (eds), IRL Press, Oxford, 1981, pp. 59–72.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mazess RB, Hanson J, Sorenson J and Barden HS. Accuracy and precision of dual-photon absorptiometry. In:Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Non-Invasive Bone Measurements. J Dequeker (ed), 1988, Leuven Press.

  9. Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Mazess RB, Towsley M, Lindsay R, Markhard L, Dempster D. Dual-photon Gd-153 absorptiometry of bone.Radiology 156:203–206; 1985.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Burgess AE, Colborne B, Zoffmann E. Vertebral trabecular bone: Comparison of single and dual-energy CT measurements with chemical analysis.J Comput Assist Tomogr. 11:506–515; 1987.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gluer CC, Reiser UJ, Davis CA, Rutt BK, Genant HK. Vertebral mineral determination by quantitative computed tomography (QCT): Accuracy of single and dual energy measurements.J Comput Assist Tomogr 12:242–258; 1988.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Laval-Jeantet AM, Roger B, Bouysse Ing S, Bergot C, Mazess RB. Influence of vertebral fat content on quantitative CT density.Radiology 159:463–466; 1986.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Vetter JR, Perman WH, Kalender WA, Mazess RB, Holden JE. Evaluation of a prototype dual-energy computed tomographic apparatus. II. Determination of vertebral bone mineral content.Med Phys 13:340–343; 1986.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rao GU, Yaghmai I, Wist AO, Arora G. Systematic errors in bone-mineral measurements by quantitative computed tomography.Med Phys 14:62–69; 1987.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sorenson JA, Hanson JA, Mazess RB. Precision and accuracy of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.J Bone Miner Res 3:S126; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mazess RB, Sorenson JA, Hanson JA, Collick BD, Smith SW. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). From: EFJ Ring (ed)Osteoporosis: Bone Mineral Measurement, Bath, UK, 1988.

  17. Mazess RB, Sorenson JA, Hanson JA. Performance of an x-ray dual-photon scanner. In:Bone Mineral Measurement by Photon Absorptiometry., J Dequeker, P Geusen, H Wahner (ed), Leuven University Press, pp 415–418, 1988.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mazess, R., Collick, B., Trempe, J. et al. Performance evaluation of a dual-energy X-ray bone densitometer. Calcif Tissue Int 44, 228–232 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556569

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02556569

Keywords

Navigation