Monitoring of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement in clinical practice

被引:55
作者
El Maghraoui, Abdellah [1 ]
Achemlal, Lahsen [1 ]
Bezza, Ahmed [1 ]
机构
[1] Mil Hosp Mohammed V, Rhematol & Phys Rehabil Dept, Rabat, Morocco
关键词
bone mineral density; dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; reproducibility;
D O I
10.1016/j.jocd.2006.03.014
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100201 [内科学];
摘要
Bone densitometry has become the "gold standard" in osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment evaluation. It has also become more and more common to perform a second dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurement to monitor bone mineral density (BMD) status or the effect of therapeutic intervention. When a second measurement is performed on a patient, the clinician needs to distinguish between a true change in BMD and a random fluctuation related to variability in the measurement procedure. The reproducibility of DXA measurements is claimed to be good. Such variability is due to multiple causes, such as device errors, technician variability, patients' movements, and variation due to other unpredictable sources. The precision error is usually expressed as the coefficient of variation (CV). However, several other statistics to express reproducibility exist such as the smallest detectable difference (SDD) or the least significant change (LSC). The SDD represents a cut-off that can be measured in an individual and is usually considered more useful than the CV in clinical practice. Indeed, the use of the SDD is preferable to the use of the CV and LSC because of its independence from BMD level and its expression in absolute units (g/cm(2)). At each measurement center, the SDD must be calculated from in vivo reproducibility data. The choice of the optimum time and site for performing follow-up scans depends on the ratio of the expected BMD treatment effect to the precision of the measurements.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 286
页数:6
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]
Blake Glen M, 2002, Semin Musculoskelet Radiol, V6, P207, DOI 10.1055/s-2002-36718
[2]
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[3]
Overview of osteoporosis: pathophysiology and determinants of bone strength [J].
Bono, CM ;
Einhorn, TA .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2003, 12 (Suppl 2) :S90-S96
[4]
Improvement in spine bone density and reduction in risk of vertebral fractures during treatment with antiresorptive drugs [J].
Cummings, SR ;
Karpf, DB ;
Harris, F ;
Genant, HK ;
Ensrud, K ;
LaCroix, AZ ;
Black, DM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 112 (04) :281-289
[5]
Assessment of bone density and bone loss [J].
Eastell, R .
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 1996, 6 :3-5
[6]
Reproducibility of bone mineral density measurements using dual X-ray absorptiometry in daily clinical practice [J].
El Maghraoui, A ;
Zounon, AAD ;
Jroundi, I ;
Nouijai, A ;
Ghazi, M ;
Achemlal, L ;
Bezza, A ;
Tazi, MA ;
Abouqual, R .
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 16 (12) :1742-1748
[7]
Epidemiology of hip fractures in 2002 in Rabat, Morocco [J].
El Maghraoui, A ;
Koumba, BA ;
Jroundi, I ;
Achemlal, L ;
Bezza, A ;
Tazi, MA .
OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 16 (06) :597-602
[8]
Corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis [J].
El Maghraoui, A .
PRESSE MEDICALE, 2004, 33 (17) :1213-1217
[9]
Osteoporosis and ankylosing spondylitis [J].
El Maghraoui, A .
JOINT BONE SPINE, 2004, 71 (04) :291-295
[10]
El Maghraoui A, 1999, J RHEUMATOL, V26, P2205