Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry Does Not Represent Bone Structure in Patients with Osteoporosis A Comparison of Lumbar Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry with Vertebral Biopsies

被引:10
作者
Pumberger, Matthias [1 ]
Palmowski, Yannick [1 ]
Strube, Patrick [2 ]
Schwemmer, Christin [1 ]
Roll, Stephanie [3 ]
Zippelius, Timo [2 ]
Putzier, Michael [1 ]
机构
[1] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Ctr Musculoskeletal Surg, Spine Dept, Charitepl 1, D-10117 Berlin, Germany
[2] Univ Klinikums Jena, Klin Orthopadie, Dept Wirbelsaule, Campus Waldkkliniken Eisenberg, Eisenberg, Germany
[3] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Inst Social Med Epidemiol & Hlth Econ, Berlin, Germany
关键词
areal bone mineral density; bone architecture; bone quality; dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry; micro-computed tomography; osteoporosis; osteopotic fracture; spine; T-score; vertebral biopsy; MINERAL DENSITY; MICRO-CT; TOMOGRAPHY; MANAGEMENT; SPINE; DXA;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000003917
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Prospective cross-sectional exploratory study. Objective. To evaluate the correlation between in vivo lumbar dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and parameters of bone architecture in micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) in patients with osteoporosis. Summary of Background Data. DXA is the current diagnostic standard for evaluating osteoporosis. However, there are various concerns regarding its validity, especially in the spine. No study has so far investigated whether in vivo DXA correlates with the actual lumbar bone architecture. Methods. Lumbar DXA scans were compared with micro-CT analysis of vertebral biopsies in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures (fracture group) and those without (control group). Preoperatively, all patients underwent a DXA scan (L1-L4). Intraoperative biopsies from nonfractured vertebrae (preferably L3) were analyzed by micro-CT regarding bone quantity and quality. The groups were compared regarding differences in DXA and micro-CT results. In each group, a correlation analysis was performed between DXA and micro-CT. Results. The study included 66 patients (33 per group). Preoperative DXA results were worse in the fracture group than the control group (areal bone mineral density [aBMD] 0.95 vs. 1.31, T-score -1.97 vs. 0.92, each P< 0.001). Micro-CT analysis confirmed differences regarding quantitative parameters (bone/total volume: 0.09 vs. 0.12, P< 0.001) and qualitative parameters (connectivity index: 15.73 vs. 26.67, P< 0.001; structure model index: 2.66 vs. 2.27, P< 0.001; trabecular number: 2.11 vs. 2.28, P = 0.014) of bone architecture between both groups. The DXA results did not correlate with micro-CT parameters in the fracture group. In the control group, correlations were found for some parameters (bone/total volume vs. aBMD: r = 0.51, P = 0.005; trabecular number vs. aBMD: r = 0.56, P = 0.001). Conclusion. These data constitute the first comparison of DXA measurements with microstructural analysis of vertebral biopsies in patients with osteoporosis. Our results indicate that lumbar DXA neither qualitatively nor quantitatively represents microstructural bone architecture and is therefore not a reliable tool for the evaluation of bone quality in the spine.
引用
收藏
页码:861 / 866
页数:6
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Micro-CT vs. Whole Body Multirow Detector CT for Analysing Bone Regeneration in an Animal Model [J].
Bissinger, Oliver ;
Kirschke, Jan S. ;
Probst, Florian Andreas ;
Stauber, Martin ;
Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich ;
Haller, Bernhard ;
Goetz, Carolin ;
Plank, Christian ;
Kolk, Andreas .
PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (11)
[2]   Relationships between bone mass and micro-architecture at the mandible and iliac bone in edentulous subjects: a dual X-ray absorptiometry, computerised tomography and microcomputed tomography study [J].
Bodic, Francois ;
Amouriq, Yves ;
Gayet-Delacroix, Marie ;
Maugars, Yves ;
Hamel, Luc ;
Basle, Michel F. ;
Chappard, Daniel .
GERODONTOLOGY, 2012, 29 (02) :E585-E594
[3]   Fracture Prevention in the Orthopaedic Environment: Outcomes of a Coordinator-Based Fracture Liaison Service [J].
Bogoch, Earl R. ;
Elliot-Gibson, Victoria ;
Beaton, Dorcas ;
Sale, Joanna ;
Josse, Robert G. .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2017, 99 (10) :820-831
[4]   DXA in vivo BMD methodology:: An erroneous and misleading research and clinical gauge of bone mineral status, bone fragility, and bone remodelling [J].
Bolotin, H. H. .
BONE, 2007, 41 (01) :138-154
[5]   AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF POSTMENOPAUSAL OSTEOPOROSIS-2016 [J].
Camacho, Pauline M. ;
Petak, Steven M. ;
Binkley, Neil ;
Clarke, Bart L. ;
Harris, Steven T. ;
Hurley, Daniel L. ;
Kleerekoper, Michael ;
Lewiecki, E. Michael ;
Miller, Paul D. ;
Narula, Harmeet S. ;
Pessah-Pollack, Rachel ;
Tangpricha, Vin ;
Wimalawansa, Sunil J. ;
Watts, Nelson B. .
ENDOCRINE PRACTICE, 2016, 22 :1-42
[6]   Imaging Findings of Metabolic Bone Disease [J].
Chang, Connie Y. ;
Rosenthal, Daniel I. ;
Mitchell, Deborah M. ;
Handa, Atsuhiko ;
Kattapuram, Susan V. ;
Huang, Ambrose J. .
RADIOGRAPHICS, 2016, 36 (06) :1871-1887
[7]   Clinical use of bone densitometry - Scientific review [J].
Cummings, SR ;
Bates, D ;
Black, DM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 288 (15) :1889-1897
[8]   Surgical Stabilization of the Spine in the Osteoporotic Patient [J].
Dodwad, Shah-Nawaz M. ;
Khan, Safdar N. .
ORTHOPEDIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2013, 44 (02) :243-+
[9]   Opportunistic Use of CT Imaging for Osteoporosis Screening and Bone Density Assessment A Qualitative Systematic Review [J].
Gausden, Elizabeth B. ;
Nwachukwu, Benedict U. ;
Schreiber, Joseph J. ;
Lorich, Dean G. ;
Lane, Joseph M. .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2017, 99 (18) :1580-1590
[10]   A comparison of micro-CT, microradiography and histomorphometry in bone research [J].
Gielkens, Pepijn F. M. ;
Schortinghuis, Jurjen ;
de Jong, Johan R. ;
Huysmans, Marie Charlotte D. N. J. M. ;
van Leeuwen, M. Barbara M. ;
Raghoebar, Gerry M. ;
Bos, Ruud R. M. ;
Stegenga, Boudewijn .
ARCHIVES OF ORAL BIOLOGY, 2008, 53 (06) :558-566