Suppr超能文献

使用外周定量计算机断层扫描测量胫骨骨髓密度和面积:年轻人和老年人以及脊髓损伤个体的精度。

Measuring Marrow Density and Area Using Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography at the Tibia: Precision in Young and Older Adults and Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury.

机构信息

Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.

Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Densitom. 2018 Apr-Jun;21(2):269-280. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2017.02.002. Epub 2017 Mar 27.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the test-retest precision error for peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT)-derived marrow density and marrow area segmentation at the tibia using 3 software packages. A secondary analysis of pQCT data in young adults (n = 18, mean ± standard deviation 25.4 ± 3.2 yr), older adults (n = 47, 71.8 ± 8.2 yr), and individuals with spinal cord injury (C1-T12 American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale, classes A-C; n = 19, 43.5 ± 8.6 yr) was conducted. Repeat scans of the tibial shaft (66%) were performed using pQCT (Stratec XCT2000). Test-retest precision errors (root mean square standard deviation and root mean square coefficient of variation [RMSCV%]) for marrow density (mg/cm) and marrow area (mm) were reported for the watershed-guided manual segmentation method (SliceOmatic version 4.3 [Sliceo-WS]) and the 2 threshold-based edge detection methods (Stratec version 6.0 [Stratec-TB] and BoneJ version 1.3.14 [BoneJ-TB]). Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement were computed to evaluate test-retest discrepancies within and between methods of analysis and subgroups. RMSCV% for marrow density segmentation was >5% for all methods across subgroups (Stratec-TB: 12.2%-28.5%, BoneJ-TB: 14.5%-25.2%, and Sliceo-WS: 10.9%-23.0%). RMSCV% for marrow area segmentation was within 5% for all methods across subgroups (Stratec-TB: 1.9%-4.4%, BoneJ-TB: 2.6%-5.1%, and Sliceo-WS: 2.4%-4.5%), except using BoneJ-TB in older adults. Intermethod discrepancies in marrow density appeared to be present across the range of marrow density values and did not differ by subgroup. Intermethod discrepancies varied to a greater extent for marrow area and were found to be more frequently at mid- to higher-range values for those with spinal cord injury. Precision error for pQCT-derived marrow density segmentation exceeded 5% for all methods of analysis across a range of bone mineral densities and fat infiltration, whereas precision error for marrow area segmentation ranged from 2% to 5%. Further investigation is necessary to determine alternative acquisition and analysis methods for pQCT-derived marrow segmentation.

摘要

本研究旨在比较三种软件包在胫骨外周定量计算机断层扫描(pQCT)衍生骨髓密度和骨髓面积分割的测试-重测精密度误差。对年轻成年人(n=18,平均年龄±标准差 25.4±3.2 岁)、老年人(n=47,71.8±8.2 岁)和脊髓损伤个体(C1-T12 美国脊髓损伤协会损伤量表,A-C 级;n=19,43.5±8.6 岁)的 pQCT 数据进行了二次分析。胫骨骨干的重复扫描(pQCT Stratec XCT2000)采用分水岭引导的手动分割方法(SliceOmatic 版本 4.3[Sliceo-WS])和两种基于阈值的边缘检测方法(Stratec 版本 6.0[Stratec-TB]和 BoneJ 版本 1.3.14[BoneJ-TB])进行了测试-重测精度误差(均方根标准差和均方根变异系数[RMSCV%])的评估。为了评估分析方法和亚组内及组间的测试-重测差异,计算了 Bland-Altman 图和 95%一致性界限。在所有亚组中,骨髓密度分割的 RMSCV%均超过所有方法的 5%(Stratec-TB:12.2%-28.5%,BoneJ-TB:14.5%-25.2%和 Sliceo-WS:10.9%-23.0%)。在所有亚组中,骨髓面积分割的 RMSCV%均在 5%以内(Stratec-TB:1.9%-4.4%,BoneJ-TB:2.6%-5.1%和 Sliceo-WS:2.4%-4.5%),但老年人使用 BoneJ-TB 除外。骨髓密度的组间差异似乎存在于骨髓密度值的整个范围内,并且与亚组无关。骨髓面积的组间差异变化较大,且在脊髓损伤患者的中至高范围值更为常见。所有分析方法的 pQCT 衍生骨髓密度分割的精度误差均超过 5%,而骨髓面积分割的精度误差范围为 2%至 5%。需要进一步研究以确定用于 pQCT 衍生骨髓分割的替代采集和分析方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验