Section Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Department of Computer Science, Multimedia Information Processing Group, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany.
Calcif Tissue Int. 2024 Nov;115(5):552-561. doi: 10.1007/s00223-024-01303-3. Epub 2024 Oct 16.
Osteoporosis is underdiagnosed and undertreated. To improve timely fracture risk assessment optimized densitometry methods are required such as opportunistic spinal quantitative computed tomography (QCT). However, it is unclear how to best calibrate these scans and correct for potential scanner drift of QCT when used for monitoring bone mineral density (BMD) changes. We compared gold standard simultaneous calibration with asynchronous calibration methods, assessing mid-term (12 weeks) and long-term (1.5 years) reproducibility of BMD measurements. Cortical and trabecular compartments of the European Spine Phantom were studied with ten different protocols including low dose and high resolution (HR)-modes. Based on weekly phantom data, we compared simultaneous calibration to asynchronous single (termed global) or monthly calibration. The accuracy was better for trabecular measurements than for cortical measurements for all calibration methods. Reproducibility was excellent for all methods and slightly better for asynchronous than for simultaneous calibration both for trabecular and cortical bone. For HR protocols, reproducibility was better than for low dose measurements. In trabecular compartments averaged HR-BMD remained stable for global (- 0.1%/year, ns) but not for simultaneous calibration (- 1.5%/year, p < 0.001). No significant drifts could be detected for averaged low dose BMD (- 0.9 to + 0.8%/year) for either calibration method. Our data suggest that with regard to precision and accuracy measurements with asynchronous calibration are suitable for vertebral BMD assessment (no contrast agents) in clinical practice. Regular (e.g., monthly) stability tests using a calibration phantom could assure long term stability of at least 1 year.
骨质疏松症的诊断和治疗不足。为了改善及时的骨折风险评估,需要优化骨密度测量方法,例如机会性脊柱定量计算机断层扫描(QCT)。然而,当用于监测骨密度(BMD)变化时,尚不清楚如何最好地校准这些扫描并纠正 QCT 潜在的扫描仪漂移。我们比较了金标准同步校准和异步校准方法,评估了 BMD 测量的中期(12 周)和长期(1.5 年)可重复性。使用十种不同的协议研究了欧洲脊柱模型的皮质和小梁腔,包括低剂量和高分辨率(HR)模式。基于每周的模型数据,我们比较了同步校准与异步单(称为全局)或每月校准。对于所有校准方法,小梁测量的准确性都优于皮质测量。所有方法的重复性都很好,对于小梁和皮质骨,异步校准的重复性都略好于同步校准。对于 HR 协议,重复性优于低剂量测量。在小梁腔中,平均 HR-BMD 保持稳定(全局为-0.1%/年,无统计学意义),但对于同步校准则不然(-1.5%/年,p<0.001)。对于任何校准方法,低剂量 BMD 的平均测量值都没有明显的漂移(-0.9 至+0.8%/年)。我们的数据表明,就精度和准确性而言,异步校准测量适用于临床实践中的椎体 BMD 评估(无需造影剂)。使用校准模型定期(例如每月)进行稳定性测试,可以确保至少 1 年的长期稳定性。