Bone strain index reproducibility and soft tissue thickness influence: a dual x-ray photon absorptiometry phantom study.
Absorptiometry (photon)
Bone density
Bone strain index
Fractures (bone)
Reproducibility of results
Journal
European radiology experimental
ISSN: 2509-9280
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol Exp
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101721752
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 08 2019
14 08 2019
Historique:
received:
22
02
2019
accepted:
02
07
2019
entrez:
15
8
2019
pubmed:
15
8
2019
medline:
18
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Bone strain index (BSI) is a tool measuring bone strain, derived from dual x-ray photon absorptiometry. It is able to characterise an aspect of bone quality that, joined to the quantity and quality parameters of bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score (TBS), permits an accurate definition of fracture risk. As no data are available about BSI precision, our aim was to assess its in vitro reproducibility. A Hologic spine phantom was used to perform BSI scans with three different scan modes: fast array (FA), array (A), and high definition (HD). Different soft tissue thicknesses (1, 3, 6 cm) of fresh pork rind layers as a surrogate of abdominal fat were interposed. For each scan mode, the phantom was consecutively scanned 25 times without repositioning. In all scan modes (FA, A, HD) and at every fat thickness, BSI reproducibility was lower than that of BMD. The highest reproducibility was found using HD-mode with 1 cm of pork rind and the lowest one using HD-mode with 6 cm of pork rind. Increasing fat thickness, BSI reproducibility tended to decrease. BSI least significant change appeared to be about three times that of BMD in all modalities and fat thicknesses. Without pork rind superimposition and with 1-cm fat layer, BSI reproducibility was highest with HD-mode; with 3 or 6 cm fat thickness, it was higher with A-mode. BSI reproducibility was worse than that of BMD, but it is less sensitive to fat thickness increase, similarly to TBS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Bone strain index (BSI) is a tool measuring bone strain, derived from dual x-ray photon absorptiometry. It is able to characterise an aspect of bone quality that, joined to the quantity and quality parameters of bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone score (TBS), permits an accurate definition of fracture risk. As no data are available about BSI precision, our aim was to assess its in vitro reproducibility.
METHODS
A Hologic spine phantom was used to perform BSI scans with three different scan modes: fast array (FA), array (A), and high definition (HD). Different soft tissue thicknesses (1, 3, 6 cm) of fresh pork rind layers as a surrogate of abdominal fat were interposed. For each scan mode, the phantom was consecutively scanned 25 times without repositioning.
RESULTS
In all scan modes (FA, A, HD) and at every fat thickness, BSI reproducibility was lower than that of BMD. The highest reproducibility was found using HD-mode with 1 cm of pork rind and the lowest one using HD-mode with 6 cm of pork rind. Increasing fat thickness, BSI reproducibility tended to decrease. BSI least significant change appeared to be about three times that of BMD in all modalities and fat thicknesses. Without pork rind superimposition and with 1-cm fat layer, BSI reproducibility was highest with HD-mode; with 3 or 6 cm fat thickness, it was higher with A-mode.
CONCLUSIONS
BSI reproducibility was worse than that of BMD, but it is less sensitive to fat thickness increase, similarly to TBS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31410624
doi: 10.1186/s41747-019-0110-9
pii: 10.1186/s41747-019-0110-9
pmc: PMC6692807
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
33Références
JAMA. 2001 Jan 17;285(3):320-3
pubmed: 11176842
JAMA. 2001 Feb 14;285(6):785-95
pubmed: 11176917
J Bone Miner Res. 2005 Jul;20(7):1185-94
pubmed: 15940371
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009 Oct;48 Suppl 4:iv3-8
pubmed: 19783591
J Clin Densitom. 2011 Jul-Sep;14(3):302-12
pubmed: 21724435
Clin Radiol. 2013 Jun;68(6):616-9
pubmed: 23351778
J Clin Densitom. 2013 Oct-Dec;16(4):455-66
pubmed: 24183638
Skeletal Radiol. 2015 Apr;44(4):573-6
pubmed: 25109383
Eur Radiol. 2015 Jul;25(7):2194-8
pubmed: 25663312
J Clin Densitom. 2015 Jul-Sep;18(3):309-30
pubmed: 26277849
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Jan 13;17:17
pubmed: 26757709
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2016 Jul;20(3):246-253
pubmed: 27741540
Arch Osteoporos. 2017 Dec;12(1):43
pubmed: 28425085
PLoS One. 2018 Jan 5;13(1):e0190477
pubmed: 29304151
Endocrine. 2018 Aug;61(2):336-342
pubmed: 29948934
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018 Nov;87:190-196
pubmed: 30077078
Arch Osteoporos. 2018 Aug 27;13(1):93
pubmed: 30151698
Haemophilia. 2018 Nov;24(6):980-987
pubmed: 30273987
Osteoporos Int. 2019 Jan;30(1):3-44
pubmed: 30324412