2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109321
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative dual-energy CT-based bone mineral density assessment in comparison to Hounsfield unit measurements using dual x-ray absorptiometry as standard of reference

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
31
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast to the established QCT value of 80 mg/cm 3 according to the ACR, our analysis yielded an optimal DECTbased BMD threshold of 93.7 mg/cm 3 to distinguish patients who sustained a fracture during a 2-year follow-up period from patients who did not [21,22]. This finding closely matches previous findings of our group that, contrary to ACR QCT guidelines, identified a DECT-based BMD value of 92 mg/cm 3 as an optimal cut-off to differentiate osteopenia from normal BMD [18]. This higher threshold can in part be attributed to the removal of aforementioned confounding variables as well as the elimination of technical shortcomings that underestimate conventional QCT-based BMD measurements, such as the fat error [6,24,31].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In contrast to the established QCT value of 80 mg/cm 3 according to the ACR, our analysis yielded an optimal DECTbased BMD threshold of 93.7 mg/cm 3 to distinguish patients who sustained a fracture during a 2-year follow-up period from patients who did not [21,22]. This finding closely matches previous findings of our group that, contrary to ACR QCT guidelines, identified a DECT-based BMD value of 92 mg/cm 3 as an optimal cut-off to differentiate osteopenia from normal BMD [18]. This higher threshold can in part be attributed to the removal of aforementioned confounding variables as well as the elimination of technical shortcomings that underestimate conventional QCT-based BMD measurements, such as the fat error [6,24,31].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Material differentiation in DECT can provide novel relevant information for different musculoskeletal applications compared to conventional CT [16][17][18]. Recently, a DECTbased postprocessing algorithm, which permits phantomless volumetric BMD assessment of lumbar trabecular bone, has been evaluated, showing superior results for the detection of osteoporosis compared to HU measurements as well as strong correlation with bone strength in human cadaver vertebrae specimens [17][18][19][20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, further quantitative analysis was not possible given that CT-based HU osteopenia-osteoporotic cutoffs are not yet standardized or well defined and the heterogeneous tumor characteristics of the vertebrae make interpretation difficult. [30][31][32] With more study, surrogate radiographic markers of bone density like HU or the recently published MRIbased vertebral bone quality score may help further associate the density of bone with fracture risk, instrumentation failure, and surgical outcomes. [33][34][35] The safety of using cement in the spine is established, but complications are not uncommon.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(4) (5) First, to determine the parameters of each parametrized model, anthropomorphic tissues defined by the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 44 were described by elemental composition (H, C, N, O, Na, Mg, P, S, Cl, K, Ca, Fe, I), electron density, and physical density [24]. Using this information, attenuation at 70 keV and effective atomic number was calculated using well-accepted material properties, i.e.…”
Section: A Physical Density Model Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%