Accuracy of DXA scanning of the thoracic spine: cadaveric studies comparing BMC, areal BMD and geometric estimates of volumetric BMD against ash weight and CT measures of bone volume

Biomechanical studies of the thoracic spine often scan cadaveric segments by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to obtain measures of bone mass. Only one study has reported the accuracy of lateral scans of thoracic vertebral bodies. The accuracy of DXA scans of thoracic spine segments and of anterior-posterior (AP) thoracic scans has not been investigated. We have examined the accuracy of AP and lateral thoracic DXA scans by comparison with ash weight, the gold-standard for measuring bone mineral content (BMC). We have also compared three methods of estimating volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) with a novel standard–ash weight (g)/bone volume (cm³) as measured by computed tomography (CT). Twelve T5–T8 spine segments were scanned with DXA (AP and lateral) and CT. The T6 vertebrae were excised, the posterior elements removed and then the vertebral bodies were ashed in a muffle furnace. We proposed a new method of estimating vBMD and compared it with two previously published methods. BMC values from lateral DXA scans displayed the strongest correlation with ash weight (r=0.99) and were on average 12.8% higher (p<0.001). As expected, BMC (AP or lateral) was more strongly correlated with ash weight than areal bone mineral density (aBMD; AP: r=0.54, or lateral: r=0.71) or estimated vBMD. Estimates of vBMD with either of the three methods were strongly and similarly correlated with volumetric BMD calculated by dividing ash weight by CT-derived volume. These data suggest that readily available DXA scanning is an appropriate surrogate measure for thoracic spine bone mineral and that the lateral scan might be the scan method of choice.     

Comparison of nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy with dual-photon absorptiometry and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the measurement of thoracic vertebral bone mineral density: Compressive force versus bone mineral

³¹P nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMRS) measurements were made on human T2 and T3 vertebral bodies. The bone mineral content (BMC) of isolated vertebral bodies minus the posterior elements and disks was measured using (1) NMRS on a 3.5 T, 85 mm bore GE Medical Systems NT-150 superconducting spectrometer, (2) a Lunar Corporation DPX-L dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner in an anterior-posterior (AP) orientation, (3) a Norland Corporation XR26 DXA scanner, also in an AP direction, and (4) a Norland Corporation model 2600 dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) densitometer in both the AP and superior-inferior (SI) directions. Vertebral body volumes were measured using a water displacement technique to determine volume bone mineral densities (VBMD). They were then compressed to failure using an electrohydraulic testing device, followed by ashing in a muffle furnace at 700 °C for 18 h. Correlations of BMC between NMRS and DPA, DXA and ashing were excellent (0.96r0.99); in a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, means were not statistically different at ap level of 0.757. The correlations of VBMD between NMRS and the other methods were not as good (0.83r0.95); in a one-way ANOVA test, means were not statistically different at ap level of 0.089. BMC was a better predictor of ultimate compressive failure than VBMD for all six methods. For NMRS, the regression coefficient for BMC wasr ²=0.806, compared withr ²=0.505 for VBMD. NMRS may prove an alternative to present methods of determing bone mineral.     

Failure strength of human vertebrae: prediction using bone mineral density measured by DXA and bone volume by micro-CT

Significant relationships exist between areal bone mineral density (BMD) derived from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and bone strength. However, the predictive validity of BMD for osteoporotic vertebral fractures remains suboptimal. The diagnostic sensitivity of DXA in the lumbar spine may be improved by assessing BMD from lateral-projection scans, as these might better approximate the objective of measuring the trabecular-rich bone in the vertebral body, compared to the commonly-used posterior-anterior (PA) projections. Nowadays, X-ray micro-computed tomography (μCT) allows non-destructive three-dimensional structural characterization of entire bone segments at high resolution. In this study, human lumbar cadaver spines were examined ex situ by DXA in lateral and PA projections, as well as by μCT, with the aims (1) to investigate the ability of bone quantity measurements obtained by DXA in the lateral projection and in the PA projection, to predict variations in bone quantity measurements obtained by μCT, and (2) to assess their respective capabilities to predict whole vertebral body strength, determined experimentally. Human cadaver spines were scanned by DXA in PA projections and lateral projections. Bone mineral content (BMC) and BMD for L2 and L3 vertebrae were determined. The L2 and L3 vertebrae were then dissected and entirely scanned by μCT. Total bone volume (BV(tot)=cortical+trabecular), trabecular bone volume (BV), and trabecular bone volume fraction (BV/TV) were calculated over the entire vertebrae. The vertebral bodies were then mechanically tested to failure in compression, to determine ultimate load. The variables BV(tot), BV, and BV/TV measured by μCT were better predicted by BMC and BMD measured by lateral-projection DXA, with higher R(2) values and smaller standard errors of the estimate (R(2)=0.65-0.90, SEE=11%-18%), compared to PA-projection DXA (R(2)=0.33-0.53, SEE=22%-34%). The best predictors of ultimate load were BV(tot) and BV assessed by μCT (R(2)=0.88 and R(2)=0.81, respectively), and BMC and BMD from lateral-projection DXA (R(2)=0.82 and R(2)=0.70, respectively). Conversely, BMC and BMD from PA-projection DXA were lower predictors of ultimate load (R(2)=0.49 and R(2)=0.37, respectively). This ex vivo study highlights greater capabilities of lateral-projection DXA to predict variations in vertebral body bone quantity as measured by μCT, and to predict vertebral strength as assessed experimentally, compared to PA-projection DXA. This provides basis for further exploring the clinical application of lateral-projection DXA analysis.     

DXA estimates of vertebral volumetric bone mineral density in children: potential advantages of paired posteroanterior and lateral scans.

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) estimates of areal bone mineral density (BMD) are confounded by bone size in children. Two strategies have been proposed to estimate vertebral volumetric BMD: (1) bone mineral apparent density (BMAD) is based on the posteroanterior (PA) spine scan; (2) width-adjusted bone mineral density (WABMD) is based on paired PA lateral scans. The objective of this study was to compare DXA estimates of vertebral bone mineral content (BMC), volume and volumetric BMD obtained from Hologic PA scans (Hologic, Inc., Bedford, MA) alone, and paired PA lateral scans in 124 healthy children, ages 4 to 20 yr. The PA scans were used to estimate bone volume (PA Volume) as (PA Area)1.5 and BMAD as [(PA BMC)/(PA Volume)]. Paired PA lateral scans were used to estimate width-adjusted bone volume (WA Volume) as [(pi/4)(PA width)(lateral depth)(vertebral height)] and WABMD as [(lateral BMC)/(WA Volume)]. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare the relationship between scan type (PA vs. paired PA lateral) and bone outcomes, and the effects of height and maturation on this relationship. The estimates of BMC and volume derived from PA scans and paired PA lateral scans were highly correlated (r>0.97); WABMD and BMAD were less correlated (r=0.81). The increases in BMC, volume, and volumetric BMD with greater height and maturation were significantly larger (all p<0.001) when estimated from paired PA lateral scans, compared with PA scans alone. The proportion of spine BMC contained within the vertebral body, versus the cortical spinous processes, increased significantly with age (p<0.001) from 28% to 69%. The smaller increases in bone measures on PA scans may have been due to magnification error by the fan beam as posterior tissue thickness increased in taller, more mature subjects, and the distance of the vertebrae from the X-ray source increased. In conclusion, paired Hologic PA lateral scans may increase sensitivity to growth-related increases in trabecular BMC and density in the spine, with less bias due to magnification error.     

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of the spine in anteroposterior and lateral projections

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) of the lumbar spine provides an estimation of the bone mineral content (BMC) corrected by the projected area of the spine and expressed in g/cm². This two-dimensional estimate of the bone mineral density (BMD) is influenced by the skeletal size, assessed by the subject's height. In order to obtain an estimate of the volumetric BMD, we measured BMC with a new DXA device (Sophos L-XRA) equipped with 24 detectors and a rotating arm, thus allowing scanning of the lumbar spine in both an anteroposterior (AP) projection and a lateral (LAT) projection with the patient in a supine position. Comparison between the results obtained on the third (L3) and fourth (L4) lumbar vertebrae with automatic or manual analysis showed that the best precision was obtained with the lateral measurement of L3 alone with an automatic soft tissue baseline determination. Results were expressed in g/cm² and in g/cm³ (by dividing the g/cm² value by the width (AP area divided by the height of the vertebra) of L3), and were compared with those obtained by conventional AP scanning of L2–4 (g/cm²). The in vivo precision error evaluated by triplicate measurements on 10 controls was 17 mg/cm² (1.96%) and 5.2 mg/cm³ (2.31%) for LAT L3 as compared with 13 mg/cm² (1.15%) for AP L2–4. Volumetric BMD (g/cm³) measurement, assessed in vitro on a calibrated hydroxyapatite phantom, and the absolute values obtained in normal women were similar to those obtained by quantitative computed tomography (QCT). In 39 healthy adults (27±4 years) BMD expressed in g/cm² was correlated with height (r=0.36 for AP L2–4 andr=0.39 for LAT L3;p<0.05 for both) but not with LAT L3 BMD expressed in g/cm³ (r=0.02; NS). The age-related bone loss between 30 and 80 years of age, derived from the normal values for 101 healthy women (age range 19–73 years) was 36% for AP L2–4, 52% for LAT L3 (g/cm²) and 60% for LAT L3 (g/cm³). In a group of 22 women with untreated postmenopausal vertebral osteoporosis (one or more non-traumatic vertebral crush fractures) the mean decrease in BMD, expressed as a percentage of the age-adjusted normal value, was more pronounced (p<0.001) for LAT L3 BMD (–21% in g/cm²,Z-score –1.08; –22% in g/cm³,Z-score –0.94) than for AP L2–4 BMD (–9%,Z-score –0.66). We conclude that: 1) BMD measurement restricted to the vertebral body of L3 can be achieved with a low precision error with this new DXA device; 2) it allows an estimate of the volumetric density (g/cm³) which does not seem to be influenced by skeletal size; 3) lateral BMD appears to be more sensitive than conventional AP scanning for assessing age-related bone loss and should be useful in the investigation of trabecular osteoporosis.     

Relative contribution of vertebral body and posterior arch in female and male lumbar spine peak bone mass

Peak bone mass (PBM) is an important reference value in the diagnosis of osteoporosis. It is usually established by determining the areal bone mineral density (BMD in g/cm²) for a given site of the skeleton in young healthy adults. This measurement takes into account both the thickness and the integrated mineral density of the bone scanned. It should therefore be a major determinant of the resistance to mechanical stress. However, in lumbar spine the mean BMD as determined by dual-energy either isotopic or X-ray (DXA) absorptiometry in antero-posterior (ap) view was repeatedly found not to be different between male and female young healthy adults despite the greater volume of lumbar vertebral bodies in males. A greater contribution of the posterior vertebral arch to areal BMD-ap in females than in males could account for such an apparent discrepancy. In order to clarify this issue we have determined in 65 (32 male and 33 female) young healthy adults aged 20–35 years the relative contribution of the vertebral body (VB) and posterior vertebral arch (VA) to BMD and bone mineral content (BMC) of L2–3 measured by both antero-posterior and lateral (lat) scanning using DXA. In young healthy adults mean BMC in antero-posterior view was found not to be significantly different from the total BMC determined by lateral scanning including both VB and VA. This allowed us then to calculate the VA BMC by substracting VB BMC-lat from BMC-ap. The results indicated that the mean value for males was significantly greater than that for females for BMC-ap (male/female ratio (mean±SEM): 1.16±0.05,p<0.01), BMC-lat (1.38±0.07,p<0.001) and VB BMD-lat (1.16±0.04,p<0.001). In sharp contrast, no sex difference was found in BMD-ap (male/female ratio: 0.99±0.03) and VA BMC (male/female ratio: 0.97±0.06). VA BMC represented 44% and 53% (p<0.001) of BMC-ap in males and females, respectively. Furthermore, in neither sex was any correlation between VA BMC and VB BMC found. In summary, this study indicates that the relative contribution of the posterior vertebral arch to the bone mineral content of L2–3 is significantly smaller in males than in females. This difference could partly explain the absence of a sex difference in areal BMD as measured in antero-posterior view. In agreement with lumbar anthropomorphometric data this study further shows that the sex difference in vertebral body size, an important component in mechanical resistance, is expressed when areal BMD is measured in lateral but not in antero-posterior scanning. Finally, the data analysis underlines the quantitative importance of the vertebral arch in the value of areal BMD as measured by DXA in the classical antero-posterior view, and demonstrates the absence of a significant quantitative relationship between the bone mineral content of the vertebral body and that of the posterior vertebral arch.     

Subregional DXA-Derived Vertebral Bone Mineral Measures are Stronger Predictors of Failure Load in Specimens with Lower Areal Bone Mineral Density,Compared to Those with Higher Areal Bone Mineral Density

Measurement of areal bone mineral density (aBMD) in intravertebral subregions may increase the diagnostic sensitivity of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-derived parameters for vertebral fragility. This study investigated whether DXA-derived bone parameters in vertebral subregions were better predictors of vertebral bone strength in specimens with low aBMD, compared to those with higher aBMD. Twenty-five lumbar vertebrae (15 embalmed and 10 fresh-frozen) were scanned with posteroanterior- (PA) and lateral-projection DXA, and then mechanically tested in compression to ultimate failure. Whole-vertebral aBMD and bone mineral content (BMC) were measured from the PA- and lateral-projection scans and within 6 intravertebral subregions. Multivariate regression was used to predict ultimate failure load by BMC, adjusted for vertebral size and specimen fixation status across the whole specimen set, and when subgrouped into specimens with low aBMD and high aBMD. Adjusted BMC explained a substantial proportion of variance in ultimate vertebral load, when measured over the whole vertebral area in lateral projection (adjusted R ² 0.84) and across the six subregions (ROIs 2–7) (adjusted R ² range 0.58–0.78). The association between adjusted BMC, either measured subregionally or across the whole vertebral area, and vertebral failure load, was increased for the subgroup of specimens with identified ‘low aBMD’, compared to those with ‘high aBMD’, particularly in the anterior subregion where the adjusted R ² differed by 0.44. The relative contribution of BMC measured in vertebral subregions to ultimate failure load is greater among specimens with lower aBMD, compared to those with higher aBMD, particularly in the anterior subregion of the vertebral body.     

Frame size, ethnicity, lifestyle, and biologic contributors to areal and volumetric lumbar spine bone mineral density in Indian/Pakistani and American Caucasian premenopausal women.

Published data on the spinal bone mineral density (BMD) of premenopausal women originating from the Indian subcontinent (Indian/Pakistani) are few. We compared anteroposterior (AP) and lateral areal BMD (aBMD) using dual X-ray absorptiometry and calculated volumetric BMD (vBMD) in Indian/Pakistani (n = 47) vs American (n = 47) women with dissimilar statures and skeletal sizes. To account for differences, we "adjusted" lumbar aBMD separately for vertebral size (aBMD/the square root of the projected area), height (aBMD/height), and hip skeletal width (aBMD/hip width). We "corrected" bone mineral content (BMC), aBMD, and vBMD for frame size, collectively using height, hip width, and vertebral size. Unadjusted mean aBMD values for AP lumbar (L1-L4, p = 0.0086; L3-L4, p = 0.044) spine were higher in Americans than Indians/Pakistanis,whereas lateral vBMD (p = 0.56) or aBMD (p = 0.060) values were not different. After adjusting for height, hip width, or vertebral size, or correcting for frame size, differences in aBMD disappeared. Regression analyses indicated that the best measures to correct for frame size were: vertebral area for BMC, hip width for aBMD, and vertebral width for lateral vBMD. Height was not significant in any model. In correcting for frame size, we accounted for 73-85% of the variability in BMC, 22-28% in aBMD, and 27% in lateral vBMD. After frame size was corrected, we accounted for 34% of the variability in AP BMC and aBMD, in contrast with 6-9% in the lateral models. Five significant biologic and lifestyle factors remained in AP models; only body weight remained for lateral spine. Upon accounting for frame size using regression, much variability in BMD, aBMD, and vBMD was explained by lifestyle and biologic factors, not by ethnicity.     

DEXA Measurement of spine density in the lateral projection. I: Methodology

Summary Bone mineral content and bone mineral density (BMC in g and BMD in g/cm²) were measured using dualenergy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). DEXA scans in the lateral decubitus position required about 12 minutes for the L2−L4 sequence at 0.75 mA (dose 5 mrem) and 4 minutes at 4.75 mA (7 mrem). The former scans were done with the Lunar DPX densitometer and the latter with the Lunar DPX-L One test of the algorithms used for measurement is the equality of BMC in both AP and lateral projections. BMC in the lateral projection averaged about 1% lower than in the AP projection in phantoms and for L2+L3 in 8 subjects, but the difference was not significant. Additional tests were done on the effects of tissue thickness and position from the tabletop. There was little or no influence of tissue thickness from 18 to 30 cm on BMD results, but there was a small influence of thickness below 18 cm (0.01 g/cm²;P=0.01) and of distance from the tabletop at extremes of positioning (0.02 g/cm²;P=0.06). The precisionin vivo was similar for both 4- and 12-minute scans; the standard deviation of repeat measurements was about 0.02 g/cm², which was about 2% relative to the mean BMD for a region within the vertebral body. The latter region included half the BMC of the body, or 24% of the entire vertebra. Results of 4-minute scans on the DPX and 12-minute scans on the DPX-L in 9 subjucts were highly correlated (r=0.98;P<0.001).     

Evaluation of lumbar spine bone mineral density in the anteroposterior and lateral projections by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is an established method for estimating bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine. In a prospective study, the sensitivity of BMD measurements between anteroposterior and lateral projections were evaluated in 204 postmenopausal women based on their DXA analysis. Patients were divided into two groups according to the absence or presence of lumbar scoliosis. Lateral projection DXA measurements were more sensitive than AP projection measurements for early detection of bone loss in postmenopausal women. Lateral projection DXA analysis is not recommended in spines with lumbar scoliosis.     

Lateral spine densitometry is a more sensitive indicator of glucocorticoid-induced bone loss.

Osteoporosis is a common complication of glucocorticoid therapy. Bone density measurement is now commonly used in assessing which steroid-treated patients require specific interventions to reduce fracture risk. The recently developed techniques for the measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) of the vertebral body alone, by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the lateral projection, may be particularly useful in this context since steroid-induced bone loss is most marked in trabecular-rich regions like the vertebral body. This possibility has been assessed in the present study by the measurement of BMD in the lateral and anterioposterior (AP) projections in 28 women receiving chronic glucocorticoid treatment. The two BMD measurements were significantly related (r = 0.62, p < 0.001). When expressed in relation to age-appropriate normal values, lateral BMDs were lower than AP BMDs both in percentage terms (70.8 +/- 4.4 versus 90.3 +/- 2.6%, p < 0.001) and in terms of Z scores (-1.42 +/- 0.22 versus -0.91 +/- 0.24, p = 0.027). AP BMD Z scores classified 12 patients as osteopenic, whereas a further 7 were so categorized by lateral BMD Z score. It is concluded that lateral DXA scanning is a more sensitive indicator of glucocorticoid-induced osteopenia than conventional BMD measurement in the AP projection.     

Experimental validation of DXA and MRI-based bone density measurement by ash-method

Different methods have been established for bone density measurements such as dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), quantitative computertomography (QCT), and scintigraphy (VQ-Scan). There are hints that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) might become a new option for the evaluation of bone density. The aim of this study was to investigate correlations between MRI vs. DXA and MRI vs. mineral content of lumbar vertebrae. Data were obtained from ten lumbar vertebral bodies of cattles. The T-1 MRI-sequences SE, PS, and the T-2 Sequence STIR were used for analysis. Total pixel numbers and a pixel per area ratio were determined. Values were compared to DXA-measurements, to the wet weight, and to separated measurements of the spongious, trabecular, and total mineral content of the vertebral body after ashing. We found correlations between DXA (g/vertebral body) vs. mineral content by ash-method (0.918; p < 0.01), DXA vs. MRI (SE-sequence) (-0.872; p < 0.01), and MRI (SE-sequence) vs. mineral content (0.775; p < 0.01). No correlations were found between PS- or STIR-sequences and the ash-method. This study shows that the determination of the bone mineral content of vertebrae is possible applying MRI in the T1-weighted SE-sequence. Without radiation, the MRI provides additionally early detection of trabecular lesions, fractures, and deformities at the spine, without other diagnostic procedures becoming necessary.     

Failure load of thoracic vertebrae correlates with lumbar bone mineral density measured by DXA

Fractures of the thoracic spine account for a large portion of vertebral fractures in the elderly, yet noninvasive measurements of bone mineral properties are limited to the L2–L4 vertebral bodies. The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether bone mineral properties of the umbar spine correlate with the failure properties of thoracic ertebrae. Cadaveric lumbar segments were scanned using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) from both the latcrol and anteroposterior projections. Three-body segments L1–L3 and T10–T12 were then compressed to create crush tractures in the L2 and T11 vertebral bodies, and linear corelation analyses were performed to compare each DXA measure with the failure properties of L2 and T11. Lumbar BMD from the lateral view correlated significantly with T11 altimate load (r=0.94, P<0.001), as did lumbar BMD from the anteroposterior projection (r=0.83, P=0.001). Significant correlations were also found between both lumbar BMD and BMC and the stiffness and energy to failure of I'll. Furthermore, BMD and BMC measured at L2 correlated significantly with L2 ultimate load, stiffness, and energy to failure. We conclude that bone mineral properties measured at the lumbar spine provide a valid assessment of the compressive strength of both thoracic and lumbar vertebrae. Lumbar BMD may therefore be used to derive an index for the prediction of thoracolumbar fractures to aid in the early intervention of vertebral fractures.Portions of this work were presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society and appeared in abstract form in the conference proceedings.     

Differential Effects of Bone Mineral Content and Bone Area on Vertebral Strength in a Swine Model

Since the biomechanical competence of a vertebral body may be closely related to the content and distribution of the bone mineral, we have evaluated the effects of projected vertebral bone area (BA) and bone mineral parameters [bone mineral content (BMC) or bone mineral density (BMD)] on their biomechanical competence. We used dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to assess the bone mineral parameters of 36 swine thoracic vertebrae (T1–T12) and 15 lumbar vertebrae (L1–L5) after removal of the posterior elements. The failure load, compressive stress, and the stored strain energy of these vertebral bodies were assessed by a uniaxial compressive test using an MTS 810 testing system. Multiple regression analysis showed a significantly negative effect of BA and significantly positive effect of BMC on the biomechanical competence (compressive stress, r²= 0.67, P < 0.0001; failure load, r²= 0.75, P < 0.0001). However, the stored strain energy was only related to the BMC (r²= 0.35, P < 0.0001). The contributory effects of BMC and BA on the biomechanical competence were not equal. The effects of BMC was larger than BA in determining the failure load and stored strain energy, whereas the reverse was found for the compressive stress. Using the log-transformed parameters as the regressors resulted in similar results. These results suggested the differential effects of BA and BMC in determining the biomechanical competence of vertebral bodies. We recommend the use of both parameters instead of BMD alone for evaluation of the vertebral biomechanical competence. Received: 26 June 1997 / Accepted: 8 January 1998     

Interpretation of lumbar spine densitometry in women with fractures

Identification of postmenopausal women at risk of developing osteoporotic fractures is a major clinical problem. In this study the use of projected planar lumbar bone density values for individual fracture risk assessment was questioned. Osteodensitometry (DXA) results from 415 normal women, 62 women with previous vertebral compressions, and 76 women with previous low-energy fractures were analyzed, together with their body size and lumbar vertebral body size variables. The following were found: (1) Lumbar vertebral projected bone mineral areal density (BMD) and bone mineral content (BMC) of normal women correlated with body size variables (p<0.001). (2) Lumbar vertebral body size variables also correlated with body size variables (p<0.001). Logistic regression analysis of measured and derived physical variables from women without and with vertebral compression fractures (n=477) showed: (3) The best compression fracture discriminator, significantly better than BMD, was BMC divided by (H_max/165 cm)¹⁵×(D/4.35 cm)^1.5, where H_max is the body height (cm) at the menopause, and D the mean lumbar vertebral diameter of the three mid-lumbar vertebral bodies (cm). This parameter was termed BMC_corr.. ROC analysis showed: (4) At a BMC_coor. true positive ratio of 80% the corresponding uncorrected BMC or BMD true positive ratio was only 60%. The corresponding false positive ratio was 6%. Lumbar osteodensitometry could not be used to identify women with a history of peripheral low-energy fractures. (5) BMC_coor. did not, unlike BMC and BMD, correlate with body size and vertebral size variables. (6) Likewise, an observed correlation between BMC and lean body mass in a subpopulation of 116 normal women was abolished when BMC_corr. replaced BMC. We suggest that vertebral compression fracture risk limits based on BMC, corrected for individual differences in body size and vertebral body size, replace the commonly used BMD fracture risk limits. The discriminatory ability of BMC_corr. for low-energy fractures needs to be tested in a different population.This investigation was carried out as part of a collaborative study by the Danish Osteoporosis Study Group (DOPS: O. Helmer Sørensen, L. Mosekilde, P. Charles, H. Beck-Nielsen and S. Pors Nielsen).     

Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae.

The rabbit could be a superior animal model to use in bone physiology studies, for the rabbit does attain true skeletal maturity. However, there are neither normative bone mineral density (BMD) data on the rabbit nor are there any validation studies on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure spinal BMD in the rabbit. Therefore, our aim was twofold: first, to investigate whether DXA could be used precisely and accurately to determine the bone mineral content (BMC). bone area (BA). and BMD of the rabbit lumbar spine: Second. to evaluate the new generation fan-beam DXA (Hologic QDR-4500) with small animal software by comparing two DXA methodologies QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 with each other, as well as against volumetric bone density (VBMD) derived from Archimedes principle. As expected. there was a magnification error in the QDR-4500 (BMC, BA. and BMD increased by 52%. 38%. and 10%, respectively, when the vertebrae were positioned flat against the scanning table). With the magnification error kept constant (vertebrae positioned 10 cm above the scanning table to match the height in vivo). there were no differences among the mean BMC. BA. and BMD of the rabbit vertebrae (Ll-L7) in vivo and in vitro using the QDR-4500 (p > 0.05). BMC, BA, and BMD differed between QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 in vitro because of a magnification error when the vertebrae were flat on the table (p <0.0001). and, consequently. the machines did not correlate with one another (p > 0.05). However, the BMC, BA, and BMD of the two DXAs did significantly correlate with each other in vivo and in vitro when the magnification error was compensated for (r = 0.44 and 0.52. i2 = 0.45 and 0.63. and 12 = 0.41 and 0.60. respectively. p < 0.05-0.008). The BMC and BMD (in vivo and in vitro) of the rabbit vertebrae measured by QDR-4500 was significantly correlated with VMBD, ash weight, and mineral content (,2 = 0.67-0.90,j <0.01-0.0001). Therefore, the QDR-4500 can be used to yield precise and accurate measurements of the rabbit spine.     

Evaluation of vertebral volumetric vs. areal bone mineral density during growth

Bone mineral “density” (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) does not represent the volumetric density (grams per cubic centimeter), but rather the areal density (grams per square centimeter). This distinction is important during growth. The purpose of this study was to measure vertebral dimensions in cadavers of young pigtail macaques (Macaca nemestrina), and to derive equations to predict the volumetric bone density from noninvasive measurements. We measured the areal bone density by DEXA, vertebral volume by underwater weighing, mineral content by ashing, dimensions of lumbar vertebrae by calipers, and dimensions of vertebrae by radiography. Somatometric measurements of the female lumbar vertebral bodies showed that the shape changed during growth. The bone mineral content from the densitometer correlated significantly with the ash weight (r = 0.99, error 8.7%). The correlation coefficient between the volumetric bone mineral density and areal BMD measurement was significant (r = 0.68, p < 0.0001) with a 9.5% error; this improved significantly to 0.82 (7.2% error) when the BMD was divided by the vertebral depth from the radiograph. Areal BMD showed a strong correlation with age (r = 0.82, p < 0.0001), with an average increase of 7.4%/year. In contrast, volumetric mineral density showed a weak relationship with age (r = 0.43, p < 0.01), for an average increase of 1.5%/year. When studying bone mineral density during growth, the differences between volumetric and areal bone mineral density should be taken into consideration. (     

New or worsening lumbar spine vertebral fractures increase lumbar spine bone mineral density and falsely suggest improved skeletal status.

Changes in lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) are determined by follow-up dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) assessments. Inclusion of new or worsening vertebral fractures in follow-up measurements may increase BMD. To test this hypothesis, we examined pooled data from the placebo groups of two clinical trials that involved postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. DXA measurements of lumbar spine BMD, bone mineral content (BMC), and area were obtained at baseline and at two years in the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) Trial and at baseline and study endpoint in the Fracture Prevention Trial. In these trials, fractured vertebrae identified by expert radiologists during posterioranterior (PA) spine DXA assessment were excluded from the BMD assessment. Lateral spine radiographs were graded using a semi-quantitative (SQ) scale. Most new or worsening vertebral fractures (84%) diagnosed from lateral spine radiographs were not identified by PA spine DXA. While the follow-up BMD of vertebrae without new or worsening fractures did not change significantly, each unit increase in SQ grade was associated with an approximate 7.0% increase in the BMD of affected vertebrae (p < 0.001). Increases in BMD were highly correlated with increases in BMC (r = 0.87, p < 0.001). Inclusion of new or worsening vertebral fractures increased PA spine BMD measurements at follow-up, with the impact being related to the magnitude of change in SQ score. It is difficult to reliably identify vertebral fractures from PA spine DXA assessments. Inclusion of new or worsening vertebral fractures in follow-up DXA measurements may falsely suggest an improvement in spine BMD. Our suggestion is to perform lateral spine imaging concurrently with any assessment of PA spine BMD in patients who, in the opinion of the health care provider, may have vertebral fractures.     

Effect of whole body vibration (WBV) therapy on bone density and bone quality in osteopenic girls with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a randomized, controlled trial

Summary

The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to determine whether whole body vibration (WBV) therapy was effective for treating osteopenia in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. Results showed that WBV was effective for improving areal bone mineral density (aBMD) at the femoral neck of the dominant side and lumbar spine BMC in AIS subjects.

Introduction

AIS is associated with osteopenia. Although WBV was shown to have skeletal anabolic effects in animal studies, its effect on AIS subjects remained unknown. The objective of this study was to determine whether WBV could improve bone mineral density (BMD) and bone quality for osteopenia in AIS subjects.

Methods

This was a randomized, controlled trial recruiting 149 AIS girls between 15 and 25 years old and with bone mineral density (BMD) Z-scores <?1. They were randomly assigned to the Treatment or Control groups. The Treatment group (n?=?61) stood on a low-magnitude high-frequency WBV platform 20 min/day, 5 days/week for 12 months. The Control group (n?=?63) received observation alone. Bone measurement was done at baseline and at 12 months: (1) aBMD and BMC at femoral necks and lumbar spine using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and (2) bone quality including bone morphometry, volumetric BMD (vBMD), and trabecular bone microarchitecture using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) for nondominant distal radius and bilateral distal tibiae.

Results

The Treatment group had numerically greater increases in all DXA parameters with a statistically significant difference being detected for the absolute and percentage increases in femoral neck aBMD at the dominant leg (0.015 (SD?=?0.031)g/cm², 2.15 (SD?=?4.32)%) and the absolute increase in lumbar spine BMC (1.17 (SD?=?2.05)g) in the Treatment group as compared with the Control group (0.00084 (SD?=?0.026)g/cm², 0.13 (SD?=?3.62)% and 0.47 (SD?=?1.88)g, respectively). WBV had no significant effect for other bone quality parameters.

Conclusions

WBV was effective for improving aBMD at the femoral neck of the dominant side and lumbar spine BMC in AIS subjects.     

绝经后妇女骨质疏松性椎体骨折与腰椎骨密度的关系

目的探讨绝经后妇女骨质疏松性椎体骨折与腰椎骨密度的关系。方法选择骨质疏松性椎体骨折的绝经后妇女23例为骨折组,无椎体骨折的25例绝经后骨质疏松妇女为对照组。两组的年龄、绝经年限、身高、体重、体重指数差异无显著性,均行胸腰椎正侧位X线摄片。用双能X线吸收仪（DXA）测量的腰椎（L2-4）前后位骨密度（BMD）、骨矿含量（BMC）和T值。结果骨折组BMD、BMC和T值均低于对照组（P〈0.01）。结论腰椎BMD降低与绝经后妇女的骨质疏松性椎体骨折相关。绝经后骨质疏松妇女应重视BMD变化,预防椎体骨折的发生。