A Cross-Calibration Study of GE Lunar iDXA and GE Lunar DPX Pro for Body Composition Measurements in Children and Adults |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Hirabai Cowasji Jehangir Medical Research Institute, Jehangir Hospital, Pune, India;2. NutriCanvas, Mumbai, India;1. Dow Institute of Radiology, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan;2. Department of Research, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan;1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China;2. NHC Key Laboratory of Hormones and Development (Tianjin Medical University), Tianjin Key Laboratory of Metabolic Diseases, Tianjin Medical University Metabolic Diseases Hospital & Tianjin Institute of Endocrinology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China;3. Aging Research Center (ARC), Department Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet and Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden;1. Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan;2. Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA;3. Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan;4. Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou/TaoYuan, Taiwan;5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan;6. Keelung Osteoporosis Prevention and Treatment Center, Keelung, Taiwan;7. Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan;1. Department of Cardiology, Hospital Unit West, Herning, Denmark;2. Department of Cardiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark;3. Department of Nephrology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark;4. Department of Clinical Engineering, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark;5. Department of Cardiology, Regional Hospital of Silkeborg, Silkeborg, Denmark;6. Departments of Endocrinology and Internal Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark;7. Department of Rheumatology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark;8. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Denmark;1. Spinal Cord Injury and Disorders Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, VA, USA;2. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA;3. Department of Veterans Affairs Rehabilitation Research & Development Service National Center for the Medical Consequences of Spinal Cord Injury, James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA;4. Departments of Medicine and Rehabilitation Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA;5. Kessler Institute for Rehabilitation, West Orange, NJ, USA;6. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Objective: To cross-calibrate dual energy X-ray absorptiometry machines when replacing GE Lunar DPX-Pro with GE Lunar iDXA. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 126 children (3–19 years) and 135 adults (20–66 years). Phantom cross calibration was carried out using aluminum phantom provided with each of the machines on both machines. Total body less head (TBLH), lumbar spine (L2–L4) and left femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), bone mineral content (BMC), and bone area were assessed for each patient on both machines. TBLH lean and fat mass were also measured. Bland-Altman analysis, linear regressions, and independent sample t test were performed to evaluate consistency of measurements and to establish cross-calibration equations. Results: iDXA measured 0.33% lower BMD and 0.64% lower BMC with iDXA phantom as compared to DPX-Pro phantom (p < 0.001). In children, TBLH-BMC, femoral BMC and area were measured 10%–14% lesser, TBLH area was higher by 1%–2% and L2–L4 area by 10%–14% by iDXA as compared to DPX-Pro. iDXA measured higher TBLH fat [15% (girls), 31% (boys)] than DPX-Pro. In adults, TBLH-BMD (1.7%–3.4%), BMC (6.0%–10.9%) and area (4.2%–7.6%) were measured lesser by iDXA than DPX-Pro. L2–L4 BMD was higher [2.7% (men), 1.8% (women)] by iDXA than DPX-Pro. Femoral BMC was 2.11% higher in men and 4.1% lower in women by iDXA as compared to DPX-Pro. In children, R2 of cross-calibration equations, ranged from 0.91 to 0.96; in adults, it ranged from 0.93 to 0.99 (p < 0.01). After the regression equations were applied, differences in BMD values between both machines were negligible. Conclusion: A strong agreement for bone mass and body composition was established between both machines. Cross-calibration equations need to be applied to transform DPX-Pro measurements into iDXA measurements to avoid errors in assessment. This study documents a need for use of cross-calibration equations to transform DPX-Pro body composition data into iDXA values for clinical diagnosis. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
