이중에너지 방사선 흡수 계측기 ( DEXA ) 의 요추 골밀도 표준화

Objectives: Bone densitometry is a current method for evaluating skeletal status, assessing osteoporosis, and determining fracture risk. DEXA has rapidly become a dominent method for evaluating skeletal status. But the comparison of patient data among different DEXA scanners is complicated because t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Korean journal of medicine Vol. 52; no. 4; pp. 445 - 449
Main Authors 조진아, Jin A Cho, 김상우, Sang Woo Kim, 김억, Auk Kim, 구자란, Ja Ran Ku, 김용태, Yong Tae Kim, 임창훈, Chang Hoon Yim, 한기옥, Ki Oak Han, 정호연, Ho Yeon Chung, 한인권, In Kwon Han, 민헌기, Hun Ki Min
Format Journal Article
LanguageKorean
Published 대한내과학회 01.04.1997
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Objectives: Bone densitometry is a current method for evaluating skeletal status, assessing osteoporosis, and determining fracture risk. DEXA has rapidly become a dominent method for evaluating skeletal status. But the comparison of patient data among different DEXA scanners is complicated because the instruments show differences in scanner design, bone mineral calibration, and analysis algorithms. The purpose of this study is making standardization of DEXA and comparability among different DEXA system. Methods: Posteroanterior lumbar spine (L2-IA) measurements of healthy 83racially homogenous Korean women, age 38-66 years (mean 516, range of BMD 0.624-1.574g/cm) were obtained on a Lunar DPX-L, a Hologic QDR-2000, and a Norland XR-36. All sujects had no spinal deformities, ostophytes, fracture and scoliosis on thoracolumbar spinal X-ray. We performed the measurement of BMD in each subjects with different three scanners at the same time. Results: The results of cross-calibration spinal BMD (L2-4, g/cm2) in patient study (r2=0.972-0.974): Lunar DPX-L=(1.149×Hologic) +0.008=(1.022×Norland) +0.137, Hologic QDR-2000=(0.847×Lunar)+0.019= (0.876×Norland)+0.124, and Norland XR-36=(0.954×Lunar)-0.107=1.110×Hologic)-0.113. The average absolute difference in patients` spinal BMD values (L2-L4) between Lunar and Hologic was 0.146g/cm2 (14Fo); it was 0.156g/cm2 (15%) between Lunar and Norland and 0.010g/cm2 (1%) between Hologic and Norland. Conclusions: The formula of this cross-calibration shows good correlation. We conclude that it is possible to compare the different spinal BMD values obtained on the different DEXA scanners.
Bibliography:The Korean Association Of Internal Medicine
ISSN:1738-9364