Comparison of ultrasound and bone mineral density assessment of the calcaneus with different regions of interest in healthy early menopausal women

This study investigated the effect of different sized regions of interest (ROIs) on quantitative ultrasound (QUS) variables of the calcaneus. The effect on QUS of using a fixed ROI as opposed to an ROI adjusted for foot length was also assessed. Eighty Caucasian women, aged 50-57 yr (mean 53 +/- 2) who were healthy and within 0.5-5 yr of the onset of menopause participated in this study. Using the QUS-1(TM) Ultrasonometer (Metra Biosystems, Mountain View, CA), we assessed broadband ultrasound attenuation ([BUA] and UBI-4, dB/MHz), the average transit time through the heel ([TTH], mu s) and a multiple-factor index (UBI-4T = UBI-4/TTH, dB/[MH.mu s]). The QUS measurement results were calculated from three different sizes of ROI as well as one in a fixed location and one adjusted for foot size. Bone thickness, bone width, bone mineral content ([BMC], g/cm), bone mineral density area ([BMDa], g/cm(2)), and bone mineral density volume ([BMDv], g/cm(3)) were measured by single-energ photon absorptiometry. Lateral radiography of the foot was used to ensure the QUS scanning location in a subgroup. The results showed that there was a 1.4-5.9% difference in QUS parameters among different ROIs (p = 0.076-0.001). No significant differences between fixed and adjusted location were found regarding the mean values of QUS. The correlation between the fixed and adjusted locations was very strong, although there was a 12-42% unexplained variation. On the other hand, QUS in the size-adjusted ROI increased the correlation with BMC/BMD compared to the fixed QUS assessments. After controlling for body weight and height, a significant correlation between QUS and bone mass variables remained, and in some cases correlations became stronger. Lateral radiography showed that when using a fixed location to scan a large foot, the scanning area might be close to the bone edge, an area of higher BMD and potential acoustic artifacts. When scanning a small foot, the scanning area was confined to the middle of the calcaneus. Our results indicate that bone size has a modest effect on BUA. There is a better correlation with BMD when the measurement region is appropriately located in the calcaneus. This suggests that measurement location based on foot size may improve the accuracy of the measurements, resulting in good diagnostic sensitivity.