PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 1, 1991Journal of Bone and Mineral Research58 citations

Calibration of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for bone density

View Full Paper
RMRichard B. MazessJTJ. TrempeJBJoseph Bisek

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Bone mineral content (BMC, g) using DEXA (Lunar DPX) was measured on known hydroxyapatite samples in a water bath in the presence of uniform and nonuniform covering of fat-equivalent materials. Selective placement of paraffin over bone had a greater effect than lard in reducing apparent BMC, and polycarbonate plastic had a lesser effect. Measured BMC was 100.1 +/- 1.1% of actual hydroxyapatite weight when (1) fat over bone was about twice the mass of hydroxyapatite, and (2) the surrounding soft tissue was 15-30% fat. There was a linear relationship between observed and expected BMC, area (cm2), and bone mineral density (BMD, g/cm2) measured on an aluminum phantom using either the Lunar DPX or the Hologic QDR-1000. The measured area with the two densitometers was identical, but BMC differed. For both an anthropomorphic phantom and human subjects, use of a constant-threshold (0.2 g/cm2) edge-detection algorithm excluded less low-density bone from the transverse processes than the standard DPX edge-detection algorithm. Differences in edge detection could influence the results obtained with phantoms and in vivo and make system intercomparison difficult.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mazess et al. (1991) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a11c583b111c70e78618667https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650060804
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper