Blake G M, Fogelman I
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Guy's Hospital, London, England.
Semin Nucl Med. 2001 Jan;31(1):69-81. doi: 10.1053/snuc.2001.18749.
Over the past decade, bone density scanning has come to be seen as an essential part of the evaluation of patients at risk of osteoporosis. Although dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the technique most associated with the recent growth in bone densitometry, several innovative devices for performing measurements at sites in the peripheral skeleton are also available. This article examines the question of whether there is any one method or measurement site that performs better than all the others at identifying patients at risk of fracture. Given that it is essential to make greater use of the small, low-cost peripheral devices if the many millions of women most at risk are to be identified and treated, what approaches to the interpretation of bone density scans can be adopted to ensure the greatest degree of consistency among different methods? Finally, does it matter if the imperfect correlation among different types of measurement results in different patients being selected for treatment on the basis of different techniques?
在过去十年中,骨密度扫描已被视为评估骨质疏松症风险患者的重要组成部分。尽管双能X线吸收法(DXA)是与近期骨密度测定技术发展最相关的技术,但也有几种用于在外周骨骼部位进行测量的创新设备。本文探讨了是否存在一种比其他所有方法都能更好地识别骨折风险患者的方法或测量部位。鉴于如果要识别和治疗数百万风险最高的女性,必须更多地使用小型、低成本的外周设备,那么可以采用哪些骨密度扫描解释方法来确保不同方法之间的最大程度一致性?最后,不同类型测量结果之间的不完美相关性导致不同患者根据不同技术被选择进行治疗,这有关系吗?