scholarly journals Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry overestimates bone mineral density of the lumbar spine in persons with spinal cord injury

Spinal Cord ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 628-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
W A Bauman ◽  
E Schwartz ◽  
I S Y Song ◽  
S Kirshblum ◽  
C Cirnigliaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Injury ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Dual Energy ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Cord Injury

scholarly journals Bone Mineral Density in Spinal Cord Injury: An Evaluation of the Distal Femur

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Passos Gaspar ◽  
Marise Lazaretti-Castro ◽  
Cynthia M. A. Brandão
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Injury ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Distal Femur ◽  
Secondary Process ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Cord Injury

Osteoporosis (OP) in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients is a secondary process in which numerous factors are involved. Diagnosing OP and the threshold for fractures in this population, based on bone mineral density (BMD) measured by double energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), is still a challenge. The aim of this study was to evaluate bone mineral loss by DXA, its relationship with body composition and fracture incidence, in complete paraplegics patients, compared with aged-matched controls; we include a nonstandard bone site, the distal femur, and describe the technical and practical aspects of this procedure. Twenty-five SCI patients were included in the study and 17 subjects as control group. No prior or recent fractures were observed in X-ray analysis. The BMD of all femoral sites was significantly lower in patients than in controls (femoral neck, total femur, and distal femur); no difference was observed between BMD of the lumbar spine of patients and controls. We found inverse relationship between time of SCI and bone mineral mass only for distal femur BMD. We conclude that the distal femur is a more sensitive bone site for assessing bone loss by DXA, in SCI patients, than the proximal femoral sites.

scholarly journals POS0045 LEAST SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN BONE DENSITOMETRY IN PATIENTS WITH OBESITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 227.2-228
Author(s):  
D. Claire ◽  
M. Geoffroy ◽  
L. Kanagaratnam ◽  
C. Isabelle ◽  
A. Hittinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
General Population ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Bone Densitometry ◽  
Dual Energy ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Least Significant Change ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Significant Change

Background:Dual energy X-ray absoprtiometry is the reference method to mesure bone mineral density (1). Loss of bone mineral density is significant if it exceeds the least significant change. The threshold value used in general population is 0,03 g/cm2 (2). Patients with obesity are known for having a higher bone mineral density due to metabolism and physiopathology characteristics (3,4).Objectives:The aim of our study was to determine the least significant change in bone densitometry in patients with obesity.Methods:We conducted an interventionnal study in 120 patients with obesity who performed a bone densitometry. We measured twice the bone mineral density at the lumbar spine, the femoral neck and the total hip in the same time (5,6). We determined the least significant change in bone densitometry from each pair of measurements, using the Bland and Altman method. We also determined the least significant change in bone densitometry according to each stage of obesity.Results:The least significant change in bone densitometry in patients with obesity is 0,046g/cm2 at the lumbar spine, 0.069 g/cm2 at the femoral neck and 0.06 g/cm2 at the total hip.Conclusion:The least significant change in bone densitometry in patients with obesity is higher than in general population. These results may improve DXA interpretation in this specific population, and may personnalize their medical care.References:[1]Lees B, Stevenson JC. An evaluation of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and comparison with dual-photon absorptiometry. Osteoporos Int. mai 1992;2(3):146-52.[2]Briot K, Roux C, Thomas T, Blain H, Buchon D, Chapurlat R, et al. Actualisation 2018 des recommandations françaises du traitement de l’ostéoporose post-ménopausique. Rev Rhum. oct 2018;85(5):428-40.[3]Shapses SA, Pop LC, Wang Y. Obesity is a concern for bone health with aging. Nutr Res N Y N. mars 2017;39:1-13.[4]Savvidis C, Tournis S, Dede AD. Obesity and bone metabolism. Hormones. juin 2018;17(2):205-17.[5]Roux C, Garnero P, Thomas T, Sabatier J-P, Orcel P, Audran M, et al. Recommendations for monitoring antiresorptive therapies in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Jt Bone Spine Rev Rhum. janv 2005;72(1):26-31.[6]Ravaud P, Reny JL, Giraudeau B, Porcher R, Dougados M, Roux C. Individual smallest detectable difference in bone mineral density measurements. J Bone Miner Res. août 1999;14(8):1449-56.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.

The Difference of Bone Mineral Density of Lumbar Spine and Wrist in the Preterm and Full-term Infants: Using Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry

2000 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 371
Author(s):  
Min Jung Cha ◽  
Seung Cheol Kim ◽  
Young Seok Lee ◽  
Young Pyo Chang ◽  
Jin Young Park
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Bone Mineral ◽  
Dual Energy ◽  
Full Term ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Term Infants ◽  
X Ray ◽  
The Difference
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document