Comparative Evaluation of Local and International Reference Databases for Forearm Densitometry: Different Impacts on Diagnostic Decisions

Mészáros, Szilvia; Berkö, P; György, Genti; Hosszú, Éva; Keszthelyi, Béla; Krasznai, I; Teremi, Ferenc; Vargha, P.; Horváth, Csaba

doi:10.1016/j.jocd.2006.06.004

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The optimal testing strategy will vary according to local availability of bone mineral density testing. Geographic differences as well as the reference data base used can influence the prevalence of the diagnosis of osteoporosis 19 . Absolute fracture risk is determined best by using a composite of bone mineral density results, with the additional parameters of age, gender, fragility fracture history, and glucocorticoid use 20 …”

Section: Quantitative Assessment Of Bone Mineral Densitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Iatrogenic osteoporosis in dermatology

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Quantitative Assessment Of Bone Mineral Densitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Iatrogenic osteoporosis in dermatology

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Since its introduction in 1987, DXA has been improved over time, most evidently in reduced scan times. [5] Representatively, Pencil-beam (PB) DXA had been replaced with instruments that rely solely on fan-beam (FB) technology. [6,7] As the technology has developed, the focus of development has shifted to image quality, which has improved through advances in detector design, yielding a higher pixel density.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many cross-calibration studies have reported that systematic differences between the instruments may even exceed the annual biological BMD changes. [5,[10][11][12][13] Considering the increased number of osteoporosis patients, it is important to determine whether and how DXA mode affect the BMD.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Bone Mineral Density Differ between Fan-Beam and Pencil-Beam?: A Meta-Analysis and Systemic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has evolved from pencil-beam (PB) to narrow fan-beam (FB) densitometers. We performed a meta-analysis of the available observational studies to determine how different modes of DXA affect bone mineral density (BMD) measurements. Methods: A total of 1,233 patients (808 women) from 14 cohort studies were included. We evaluated the differences in BMD according to the DXA mode: PB and FB. Additionally, we evaluated the differences in BMD between the 2 types of FB mode: FB (Prodigy) and the most recent FB (iDXA). Pairwise meta-analysis was performed, and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for (total lumbar, total hip, and total body). Results: No significant difference was observed in total lumbar (pooled WMD,-0.013; P=0.152) and total hip BMD (pooled WMD,-0.01; P=0.889), between PB and FB. However, total body BMD was significantly lower in the PB compared to the FB group (pooled WMD,-0.014; P=0.024). No significant difference was observed in lumbar BMD (pooled WMD,-0.006; P=0.567), total hip (pooled WMD,-0.002; P=0.821), and total body (pooled WMD, 0.015; P=0.109), between Prodigy and iDXA. Conclusions: The results of this study warrant the recommendation that correction equations should not be used when comparing BMD from different modes. Further research is still needed to highlight the ways in which differences between DXA systems can be minimized.

show abstract