Suppr超能文献

骨密度仪(Prodigy)与德尔福(Delphi)脊柱和股骨扫描的骨密度测量精度比较。

Comparison of BMD precision for Prodigy and Delphi spine and femur scans.

作者信息

Shepherd J A, Fan B, Lu Y, Lewiecki E M, Miller P, Genant H K

机构信息

Department of Radiology, University of California, 185 Berry Street, Ste. 350, San Francisco, CA 94143-0946, USA.

出版信息

Osteoporos Int. 2006;17(9):1303-8. doi: 10.1007/s00198-006-0127-9. Epub 2006 Jul 6.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Precision error in bone mineral density (BMD) measurement can be affected by patient positioning, variations in scan analysis, automation of software, and both short- and long-term fluctuations of the densitometry equipment. Minimization and characterization of these errors is essential for reliable assessment of BMD change over time.

METHODS

We compared the short-term precision error of two dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) devices: the Lunar Prodigy (GE Healthcare) and the Delphi (Hologic). Both are fan-beam DXA devices predominantly used to measure BMD of the spine and proximal femur. In this study, 87 women (mean age 61.6+/-8.9 years) were measured in duplicate, with repositioning, on both systems, at one of three clinical centers. The technologists were International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) certified and followed manufacturer-recommended procedures. All scans were acquired using 30-s scan modes. Precision error was calculated as the root-mean-square standard deviation (RMS-SD) and coefficient of variation (RMS-%CV) for the repeated measurements. Right and left femora were evaluated individually and as a combined dual femur precision. Precision error of Prodigy and Delphi measurements at each measurement region was compared using an F test to determine significance of any observed differences.

RESULTS

While precision errors for both systems were low, Prodigy precision errors were significantly lower than Delphi at L1-L4 spine (1.0% vs 1.2%), total femur (0.9% vs 1.3%), femoral neck (1.5% vs 1.9%), and dual total femur (0.6% vs 0.9%). Dual femur modes decreased precision errors by approximately 25% compared with single femur results.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that short-term BMD precision errors are skeletal-site and manufacturer specific. In clinical practice, precision should be considered when determining: (a) the minimum time interval between baseline and follow-up scans and (b) whether a statistically significant change in the patient's BMD has occurred.

摘要

引言

骨密度(BMD)测量中的精度误差可能受到患者体位、扫描分析变化、软件自动化以及骨密度仪设备的短期和长期波动的影响。最小化和表征这些误差对于可靠评估随时间变化的骨密度至关重要。

方法

我们比较了两种双能X线吸收仪(DXA)设备的短期精度误差:Lunar Prodigy(GE医疗集团)和Delphi(Hologic)。这两种都是扇形束DXA设备,主要用于测量脊柱和股骨近端的骨密度。在本研究中,87名女性(平均年龄61.6±8.9岁)在三个临床中心之一的两个系统上进行了重复测量,并重新定位。技术人员获得了国际临床骨密度测量学会(ISCD)的认证,并遵循制造商推荐的程序。所有扫描均采用30秒扫描模式。精度误差通过重复测量的均方根标准差(RMS-SD)和变异系数(RMS-%CV)计算。分别对右侧和左侧股骨进行评估,并作为双股骨联合精度进行评估。使用F检验比较每个测量区域的Prodigy和Delphi测量的精度误差,以确定任何观察到的差异的显著性。

结果

虽然两个系统的精度误差都很低,但在L1-L4脊柱(1.0%对1.2%)、全股骨(0.9%对1.3%)、股骨颈(1.5%对1.9%)和双全股骨(0.6%对0.9%)处,Prodigy的精度误差显著低于Delphi。与单股骨结果相比,双股骨模式使精度误差降低了约25%。

结论

本研究表明,短期骨密度精度误差因骨骼部位和制造商而异。在临床实践中,在确定以下情况时应考虑精度:(a)基线扫描和随访扫描之间的最短时间间隔,以及(b)患者的骨密度是否发生了具有统计学意义的变化。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验