Comparison of two Hologic DXA systems (QDR 1000 and QDR 4500/A).
- 1 July 1997
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in The British Journal of Radiology
- Vol. 70 (835) , 728-739
- https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.70.835.9245885
Abstract
Bone mineral content is reliably measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), if manufacturers' recommendations and quality control (QC) procedures are followed. Several phantoms (Hologic anthropomorphic spine phantom, the Groupe de Recherche et d'Informations sur les Osteoporoses (GRIO) test objects and the European semi-anthropomorphic phantoms) were used to evaluate reproducibility, linearity, accuracy and spatial resolution of two DXA devices in vitro. These parameters were also evaluated in vivo from measurements performed on 120 volunteer patients. It was found that when one device (a single beam monodetector QDR 1000) is replaced by another (a fan beam multidetector QDR 4500/A), the novel combination of procedures described here, ensures that the accuracy of DXA study results is maintained when both devices are used in succession for the same patient. To study the possible responses in clinical situations, the influence of bone environment (soft and adipose tissues) was also evaluated. In both systems, similar performances (in vitro coefficients of variation of 0.5%) were established. At extreme bone density values, slight differences in linearity were found, as well as differences in accuracy and spatial resolution. Lumbar spine and femoral neck measurements were performed with both systems in 120 volunteers, both measurements being made on the same day. The corresponding bone mineral density (BMD) values were highly correlated (r2 = 0.985 for lumbar spine and 0.948 for the femoral neck), and the mean BMD differences were 0.68% and 0.37% for each anatomical site, respectively. Although small, these differences add to the precision error of the method, which is near 1%. A calibration curve has to be obtained in order that both devices can be equally used in regular clinical study. We concluded that when a DXA system is replaced by a new one, appropriate QC procedures must be strictly observed.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- European semi-anthropomorphic spine phantom for the calibration of bone densitometers: Assessment of precision, stability and accuracy the European quantitation of osteoporosis study groupOsteoporosis International, 1995
- Cross calibration of QDR-2000 and QDR-1000 dual-energy X-ray densitometers for bone mineral and soft-tissue measurementsBone, 1995
- Comparison of four methods for cross-calibrating dual-energy x-ray absorptiometers to eliminate systematic errors when upgrading equipmentJournal of Bone and Mineral Research, 1994
- Quality assurance for bone densitometry research studies: Concept and impactOsteoporosis International, 1993
- Precision of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry: Development of quality control rules and their application in longitudinal studiesJournal of Bone and Mineral Research, 1993
- Cross-calibration of DXA equipment: Upgrading from a hologic QDR 1000/W to a QDR 2000Calcified Tissue International, 1993
- A comparison of two dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry systems for spinal bone mineral measurementCalcified Tissue International, 1992
- Measurements of bone mineral density of the proximal femur by two commercially available dual energy X-ray absorptiometric systemsEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 1992
- Comparative performance in vitro and in vivo of Lunar DPX and Hologic QDR-1000 dual energy X-ray absorptiometersThe British Journal of Radiology, 1991
- Precision and sensitivity of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in spinal osteoporosisJournal of Bone and Mineral Research, 1991