Clinical cone beam computed tomography compared to high-resolution peripheral computed tomography in the assessment of distal radius bone

Charry, C. de; Boutroy, Stéphanie; Ellouz, Rafaa; Duboeuf, F.; Chapurlat, Roland; Follet, Hélène; Pialat, Jean‐Baptiste

doi:10.1007/s00198-016-3609-4

Cited by 23 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…De Charry and colleagues have shown that CBCT correlated well with XTremeCT-I in the quantification of microstructural parameters of the cortical and trabecular bone at the distal radius. (8) Reported correlations are comparable to those in the present study. The present study extended these analyses by including the quantification of agreement relative to XtremeCT-II and by quantifying the accuracy relative to micro-CT.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…De Charry and colleagues have shown that CBCT correlated well with XTremeCT‐I in the quantification of microstructural parameters of the cortical and trabecular bone at the distal radius . Reported correlations are comparable to those in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Notwithstanding these challenges, it has been demonstrated relative to micro‐CT analyses that it is possible to use CBCT for the quantification of bone microstructure in dental applications . Furthermore, it has been shown relative to XTremeCT‐I data that cortical and trabecular parameter of the distal radius can be correlated with CBCT for orthopedic purposes . However, the comparison of the accuracy against micro‐CT of CBCT with XTremeCT‐II has not been evaluated yet.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(6,7) Furthermore, it has been shown relative to XTremeCT-I data that cortical and trabecular parameter of the distal radius can be correlated with CBCT for orthopedic purposes. (8) However, the comparison of the accuracy against micro-CT of CBCT with XTremeCT-II has not been evaluated yet. Recently, we have demonstrated that CBCT can quantify bone microstructure accurately (9) and have shown that our in-house developed reconstruction and artefact correction program can enhance the accuracy significantly; hence, CBCT offers high potential for quantitative analyses of bone microstructure in many orthopedic applications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Correlation Between Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and High-Resolution Peripheral Computed Tomography for Assessment of Wrist Bone Microstructure

Mys

Варга

Gueorguiev

et al. 2019

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High‐resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR‐pQCT) is considered as the best technique to measure bone microarchitecture in vivo. However, a breakthrough for medical applications is inhibited because of the restricted field of view (∼9 mm) and a relatively long acquisition time (∼3 minutes). The goal of this study was to compare the accuracy of cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) and HR‐pQCT and to determine the agreement between CBCT and HR‐pQCT in quantifying bone structural parameters. Nineteen trapezia of arthritic patients were scanned four times ex vivo: 1) CBCT (NewTom 5G, Cefla, at 75 μm); 2) HR‐pQCT (XTremeCT‐I, Scanco, at 82 μm); 3) HR‐pQCT (XTremeCT‐II, Scanco, at 60.7 μm); and 4) microCT (SkyScan1172, Bruker, at 19.84 μm). XTremeCT‐I and XtremeCT‐II were reconstructed, segmented, and analyzed following the manufacturer's guidelines. CBCT was reconstructed with in‐house developed software and analyzed twice: once with an adaptive segmentation technique combined with a direct analysis method (AT‐DM) and once with a Laplace‐Hamming filtering technique combined with an indirect analysis method (LH‐IM). Parameters of interest included bone volume fraction (BV/TV) and trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), separation (Tb.Sp), and number (Tb.N). The analyses of the CBCT data showed that the AT‐DM analysis correlated better with microCT for BV/TV, Tb.Sp, and Tb.N, whereas the LH‐IM technique correlated better for Tb.Th. Evaluated over all parameters, the coefficient of determination for XtremeCT‐I, XtremeCT‐II, and CBCT were higher as R2 = 0.68, 0.72, and 0.67, respectively. For CBCT, the correlations improved when three samples with very thin trabeculae close to each other were excluded and became similar to those for XtremeCT‐I and XtremeCT‐II. Interesting for clinical practice is that those bones could be identified automatically with the CBCT scanner. We conclude that CBCT produced similar accuracy as HR‐pQCT in bone morphometric analyses of trapezia. The broader range of application, larger field of view, and shorter acquisition time make CBCT a valuable alternative to HR‐pQCT. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Correlation Between Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and High-Resolution Peripheral Computed Tomography for Assessment of Wrist Bone Microstructure

Mys

Варга

Gueorguiev

et al. 2019

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, this recent investigation was done on a smaller FOV of 6 cm × 6 cm, for which an extrapolation of the effective dose can be calculated: Assuming the distance between X‐ray source and detector is constant and considering the scan length ratio, the extrapolated effective dose would be 10.7 μSv. Another group reported an effective dose of 10 μSv for a similar acquisition protocol with the same CBCT device …”

Section: Technical Specifications For a Customized Scan Of 6 CM On Hrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical in Vivo Assessment of Bone Microarchitecture With CT Scanners: An Enduring Challenge

Tran

Vilayphiou

Koller

2019

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of bone microarchitecture in vivo is of high interest in the understanding of bone metabolism. Many fields of bone research are interested in such characterization: diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of osteoporosis, secondary osteoporosis, drug development, pediatrics, athletes, and more.The current gold standard to quantify trabecular and cortical bone microarchitecture in vivo is the high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT). This technology only allows bone extremities scanning. Therefore, developing novel technologies to assess bone microarchitecture at other bone sites seems interesting. In a recent issue of JBMR, Mys and colleagues were comparing the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and HR-pQCT in regard to micro-CT for bone microarchitecture parameters. (1) They also determined the correlation of these parameters between CBCT and HR-pQCT.The original article described the technical specifications of HR-pQCT (namely XtremeCT, referred to incorrectly in the article as XtremeCT I, and Xtreme CT II) scanners, manufactured by SCANCO Medical AG (Bruttisellen, Switzerland) and CBCT (NewTom 5G, Cefla, Verona, Italy). They presented the protocol of image acquisition, reconstruction, segmentation, and analysis for all in vivo scanners in order to compare the ex vivo assessment of trabecular bone microarchitecture of 19 trapezia. The authors concluded that CBCT and its associated image processing and analysis method is able to quantify trabecular bone microstructure of trapezia.Considering the very high interest in the community in such technologies (~850 publications in the last 15 years for HR-pQCT), we propose a corrected comparison of the scanners' performances as described below. That would allow to better understand these different imaging systems and to properly evaluate the advances in this field.In the recent article by Mys and colleagues, the comparison between the specifications of the imaging modalities was unclear, as those systems allow various acquisition modes and acquisition protocols. Moreover, several figures in the article were simply inaccurate.The CBCT device NewTom 5G offers several acquisition protocols as described in an earlier study. (2) In the latter work, an effective dose of 14.3 μSv was measured using a high-resolution scanning protocol with 12 cm × 8 cm field of view (FOV), whereas Mys and colleagues reported an effective dose of 1.6 μSv without bringing evidence for this value. Also, this recent investigation was done on a smaller FOV of 6 cm × 6 cm, for which an extrapolation of the effective dose can be calculated: Assuming the distance between X-ray source and detector is constant and considering the scan length ratio, the extrapolated effective dose would be 10.7 μSv. Another group reported an effective dose of 10 μSv for a similar acquisition protocol with the same CBCT device. (3) HR-pQCT devices, namely XtremeCT and XtremeCT II, offer a standard single stack scan with a FOV of 12.6 cm × 0.9 cm and 14 cm × 1.0 cm, res...

show abstract

Guidelines for the assessment of bone density and microarchitecture in vivo using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical cone beam computed tomography compared to high-resolution peripheral computed tomography in the assessment of distal radius bone

Cited by 23 publications

References 41 publications

Correlation Between Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and High-Resolution Peripheral Computed Tomography for Assessment of Wrist Bone Microstructure

Correlation Between Cone-Beam Computed Tomography and High-Resolution Peripheral Computed Tomography for Assessment of Wrist Bone Microstructure

Clinical in Vivo Assessment of Bone Microarchitecture With CT Scanners: An Enduring Challenge

Guidelines for the assessment of bone density and microarchitecture in vivo using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About