Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology (한국방사선학회논문지)

The Korean Society of Radiology (한국방사선학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Cross Calibration of Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Equipment for Diagnosis of Osteoporosis: between Domestic Manufacturers and Global Manufacturers

골밀도 장치의 교차분석 ; 국내 제조사와 해외 제조사 비교

  • Kim, Jung-Su (Department of Radiologic Technology, Chungbuk Health & Science University)
  • 김정수 (충북보건과학대학교 방사선과)
  • Received : 2018.11.05
  • Accepted : 2018.12.31
  • Published : 2018.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is mainly used as an X-ray test method. For equipment manufactured GE and Hologic, cross-calibration analyses (CCA) of machines from the same manufacturer and between units from different manufacturers have been conducted, but the CCA of equipment manufactured in Korea are inadequate. Through CCA, we present a formula of the intersections between the Korean medical equipment company (KEC) with GE and Hologic manufactured DXA, and among the KEC DXA. The CCA was conducted for the European Spine Phantom on DXA from four KEC and three global medical equipment company (GEC) manufacturers. We compared bone mineral density (BMD) values and calculated the CCA equation by linear regression analysis. The standard-deviations (SD) of the BMD values were highest for the Dexxum T for the low, medium, and high spine, which were 0.030, 0.029, and 0.037, respectively. The smallest SD in the low and medium vertebrae were 0.005 and 0.004 for the Horizon Ci, respectively, and 0.005 for the Osteo Pro Max in the high vertebrae. Based on the intersection equations of the KEC DXA established in this study, CCA of various KEC DXA should be established for more accurate follow-up of BMD tests in clinical environments.

골다공증의 진단에서 이중에너지 X선 흡수계수법은 가장 빈번하게 사용되는 검사이다. 외국의 골밀도 장치 제조사인 지이나 홀로직 장치에 대한 교차분석 연구는 다양하나 국내 제조사 이중에너지 X선 흡수골밀도 장치에 대한 비교 분석이 부족하다. 이에 본 연구에서는 국내 제조사의 이중에너지 X선 흡수골밀도 장치와 해외 제조사의 이중에너지 X선 흡수 골밀도 장치의 교차분석을 시행하여 교차식을 수립하였다. 유럽인 척추 팬텀을 이용한 검사에서 가장 높은 표준 편차를 보인 Dexxum T 장치의 경우 상. 중. 하부 척추에서0.030, 0.029, 0.037를 보였고, 홀로직의 Horizon Ci에서는 0.005와 0.004로 하부와 중간 척추에서 가장 낮은 표준편차를 나타냈다. 오스테오 프로맥스 장치의 경우 상부 척추에서 0.005의 표준편자를 나타냈다. 본 연구에서 도출한 국내 외 이중에너지 흡수 골밀도 장치의 교차식은 임상환경에서 골밀도 검사의 추척검사에 유용한 사례가 될 것이다. 또한 본 연구에서 제시한 국산 이중에너지 X선골밀도 장치에 대해 설정된 교차 방정식에 기초로 임상환경에서 보다 정확한 골밀도 추적 관찰을 위해 보다 다양한 국산 이중에너지 X선 골밀도 장치의 교차 보정을 설정하는 것이 필요하다.

Keywords

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_f0002.png 이미지

Fig. 1. The European Spine Phantom.

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_f0003.png 이미지

Fig. 2. Bone mineral density measured in the low spine by european spine phantom.

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_f0004.png 이미지

Fig. 3. Bone mineral density measured in the middle spine by european spine phantom.

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_f0005.png 이미지

Fig. 4. Bone mineral density measured in the high spine by european spine phantom.

Table 1. Test dual energy X-ray absorptiometry equipment list

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. Average BMD values of each dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (g/cm2) and standard deviation

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Average error of BMD values between ESP standard BMD values for each dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (g/cm2)

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_t0003.png 이미지

Table 4. Cross calibration equation ware presented between each dual energy X-ray absorptiometry.

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_t0004.png 이미지

Table 5. Cross calibration for Hologic QDR2000, Lunar and Norland DXA[9]

BSSHB5_2018_v12n7_833_t0005.png 이미지

References

  1. J. Y. Yang, Y. M. Kim, "Correlation Analysis of BMD in Proximal Femur and Spine," Journal of the Korean Fracture Society, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 570-576, 2003. https://doi.org/10.12671/jksf.2003.16.4.570
  2. R. B. Mazess, H. S. Barden, J. P. Bisek, J. Hanson, "Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry for total-body and regional bonemineral and soft-tissue composition," The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 1106-1112, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/51.6.1106
  3. P. Eiken, N. Kolthoff, O. Barenholdt, F. Hermansen, S. Pors Nielsen, "Switching from DXA pencil-beam to fan-beam. II: studies in vivo," Bone Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 667-670, 1994.
  4. H. W. Wahner, W. L. Dunn, M. L. Brown ML, B. L. Riggs, "Comparison of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine," Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Vol. 63, No. 11, pp. 1075-1084, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-6196(12)65502-5
  5. E. S. Orwoll, S. K. Oviatt, "Longitudinal precision of dual- energy x-ray absorptiometry in a multicenter study," Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 191-197, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650060213
  6. J. A. Shepherd, Y. Lu, K. Wilson, T. Fuerst, H. Genant, T. N. Hangartner, C. Wilson, D. Hans, E. S. Leib, "Cross-calibration and minimum precision standards for dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: the 2005 ISCD Official Positions, the 2005 ISCD Official Positions," Journal of Clinical Densitometry, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 31-36, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2006.05.005
  7. B. Abrahamsen, J. Gram, T. B. Hansen, H. Beck-Nielsen, "Cross calibration of QDR-2000 and QDR-1000 dual energy X-ray densitometers for bone mineral and soft-tissue measurements," Bone, Vol 16, No. 3, pp. 385-390, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/8756-3282(94)00054-9
  8. B. Oldroyd, A. H. Smith, J. G. Truscott, "Cross-calibration of GE/Lunar pencil and fan-beam dual energy densitometers - bone mineral density and body composition studies," European journal of clinical nutrition, Vol. 57, No. 8, pp. 977-987, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601633
  9. H. k. Genant, S. Grampp, C. C. Gluer, K. G. Faulkner, M. Jergas, K. Engelke, H. Satoshi, C. van Kuijk, "Universal standardization for dual x-ray absorptiometry: Patient and phantom cross-calibration results," Journal of bone and mineral research, Vol. 9, No. 10, pp. 1503-1514, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650091002
  10. Osteoprim spec sheet. Accessed at 29. November. 2018. http://orvosimuszer.optitechplus.hu/pdf/medonica/osteoprimacatalog.pdf
  11. H. Hull, Q. He, J. Thornton, J. Fahad, A. Lynn, N. P, Richard, G. Dympna, "iDXA, Prodigy, and DPXL dual energy X-ray absorptiometry whole-body scans: a cross-calibration study," Journal of Clinical Densitometry. Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 95-102, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2008.09.004
  12. W. A. Kalender, D. Felsenberg, H. K. Genant, M. Fischer, J. Dequeker, J. Reeve, "The European Spine Phantom a tool for standardization and quality control in spinal bone mineral measurements by DXA and QCT," European journal of radiology, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 83-92, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0720-048X(95)00631-Y
  13. D. Pearson, S. A. Cawte, D. J. Green. A, "Comparison of Phantoms for Cross-Calibration of Lumbar Spine DXA," Osteoporosis International, Vol. 13, No. 12, pp. 948-954, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001980200132
  14. J. S Kim, Y. H Rho, I. J Lee, K. A. Kim, I. J. Lee, J. M. Kim, "Cross-Calibration of Domestic Devices and GE Lunar Prodigy Advance Dual Energy X-Ray Densitometer Devices for Bone Mineral Measurements," Journal of Radiation Industry. Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 27-31, 2017.
  15. N. A. Pocock, P. N. Sambrook, T. Nguyen, P. Kelly, J. Freund, J. A. Eisman, "Assessment of spinal and femoral bone density by Dual X-Ray absorptiometry: Comparison of lunar and hologic instruments," Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, Vol. 7, No. 9, pp. 1081-1084, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650070911
  16. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry web site. Accessed at 29. November. 2018. https://www.iscd.org/official-positions/official-positions/