Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Impact of reference point selection on DXA-based measurement of forearm bone mineral density

Authors
  • Yu, Wei1
  • Ying, Qifeng2
  • Guan, Wenmin1
  • Lin, Qiang1
  • Zhang, Zaizhu1
  • Chen, Jianfeng3
  • Engelke, Klaus4, 5
  • Hsieh, Evelyn6
  • 1 Chinese Academy of Medicine Sciences, Department of Radiology, Perking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China , Beijing (China)
  • 2 Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital, Department of Radiology, Zhejiang, Hangzhou, China , Zhejiang (China)
  • 3 Northwestern University, Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA , Chicago (United States)
  • 4 University of Erlangen, Institute of Medical Physics, Erlangen, Germany , Erlangen (Germany)
  • 5 Bioclinica, Inc., Hamburg, Germany , Hamburg (Germany)
  • 6 Yale School of Medicine, Section of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA , New Haven (United States)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Archives of Osteoporosis
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Publication Date
Nov 09, 2019
Volume
14
Issue
1
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1007/s11657-019-0658-2
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Yellow

Abstract

SummaryFew studies have systematically evaluated the technical aspects of forearm bone mineral density (BMD) measurement. We found that BMD remained stable regardless of the reference point; however, the ROI identified was not always consistent. Our study highlights the importance of using the same reference point for serial measurements of forearm BMD.BackgroundForearm fractures are clinically important outcomes from the perspective of morbidity, health care costs, and interruption of work. BMD of the forearm, as derived by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), is a better predictor of fracture at the forearm compared with BMD measured at other sites. However, very few studies have evaluated the technical aspects of selecting the ROI for forearm BMD measurement. This study aimed to compare the BMD values measured at the 1/3 radius site using three different reference points: the ulnar styloid process, the radial endplate, and the bifurcation of the ulna and radius.MethodologyHealthy Chinese patients participating in the control group of an ongoing study at Zhejiang Provincial People’s Hospital were recruited for this study. For each patient, a DXA scan (GE Lunar Prodigy) of the forearm was performed and BMD values were separately calculated using each of the three reference points to identify the ROI. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to examine the correlation between the BMD measures derived from each reference point. The F test and independent t test were applied for more robust analysis of the differences in the variances and means.ResultsSixty-eight healthy Chinese volunteers agreed to participate in this study. The root mean square standard deviation (RMS-SD) percentages of BMD values measured at the 1/3 radius site were 2.19%, 2.23%, and 2.20% when using the ulnar styloid process, radial endplate, and the bifurcation of the ulna and radius as the reference points, respectively. Pearson’s correlation coefficients for all pairwise comparisons among these three groups were greater than 0.99. F tests and independent t tests showed p values ranging from 0.92 to 0.99. However, we observed that among 10% of patients, choosing an ROI at the ulnar styloid process led to an inability to accurately determine the BMD at the ultra-distal radius.ConclusionsGiven equal ability to determine BMD at the 1/3 radius accurately, the radial endplate or the bifurcation of the ulna and radius should be preferentially selected as the reference point for routine forearm BMD measurements in order to avoid situations in which the ultra-distal radius BMD cannot be determined.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times