Bone homogeneity factor: An advanced tool for the assessment of osteoporotic bone structure in high-resolution magnetic resonance images

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 38, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 467-472

  Langenberger, Herbert ^a   Shimizu, Yu ^a   Windischberger, Christian ^a   Grampp, Stephan ^a   Berg, Andreas ^a   Ferlitsch, Katrin ^a   Moser, Ewald ^a  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

3.0 T; Bone anisotropy; Bone homogeneity factor (BHF); High resolution magnetic resonance imaging; Osteoporosis; Texture analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; BONE HOMOGENEITY FACTOR; BONE STRUCTURE; CALCANEUS; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DUAL ENERGY X RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY; FEMALE; FEMUR NECK; HIGH RESOLUTION NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAGNETIC FIELD; MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OSTEOPOROSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SURFACE PROPERTY; TEXTURE ANALYSIS;

EID: 0038575466     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200307000-00013     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Kanis JA, Melton LJ III, Christiansen C, et al. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 1994;9(8):1137-1141.
2. Consensus development conference: prophylaxis and treatment of osteoporosis. Am J Med. 1991;90(1):107-110.
3. Grampp S, Steiner E, Imhof H. Radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis. Eur Radiol. 1997;7(10):11-19.
4. Guglielmi G. Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in the diagnosis of osteoporosis. Eur J Radiol. 1995;20(3):185-187.
5. Kanis JA. Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk. Lancet. 2002;359(9321):1929-1936.
6. Lochmuller EM, Eckstein F, Kaiser D, et al. Prediction of vertebral failure loads from spinal and femoral dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and calcaneal ultrasound: An in situ analysis with intact soft tissues. Bone. 1998;23(5):417-424.
7. Sabin MA, Blake GM, MacLaughlin-Black SM, et al. The accuracy of volumetric bone density measurements in dual x-ray absorptiometry. Calcif Tissue Int. 1995;56(3):210-214.
8. Cawte SA, Pearson D, Green DJ, et al. Cross-calibration, precision and patient dose measurements in preparation for clinical trials using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry of the lumbar spine. Br J Radiol. 1999;72(856):354-362.
9. Siffert RS, Lou GM, Covin SC, et al. Dynamic relationships of trabecular bone density, architecture, and strength in a computational model of osteopenia. Bone. 1996;18(2):197-206.
10. Kerr R, Resnick D, Sartoris DJ, et al. Computerized tomography of proximal femoral trabecular patterns. J Orthop Res. 1986;4(1):45-56.
11. Bracker MD, Watts NB. How to get the most out of bone densitometry. Results can help assess fracture risk and guide therapy. Postgrad Med. 1998;104(4):77-79, 83-86.
12. Majumdar S. A review of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of trabecular bone micro-architecture: contribution to the prediction of biomechanical properties and fracture prevalence. Technol Health Care. 1998;6(5-6):321-327.
13. Majumdar S, Kothari M, Augat P, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging: three-dimensional trabecular bone architecture and biomechanical properties. Bone. 1998;22(5):445-454.
14. Grampp S, Henk CB, Imhof H. CT and MR assessment of osteoporosis. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 1999;20(1):2-9.
15. Genant HK, Majumdar S. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of trabecular bone structure. Osteoporos Int. 1997;7(Suppl 3):S135- S139.
16. Link TM, Majumdar S, Augat P, et al. Proximal femur: Assessment for osteoporosis with T2* decay characteristics at MR imaging. Radiology. 1998;209(2):531-536.
17. Fransson A, Grampp S, Imhof H. Effects of trabecular bone on marrow relaxation in the tibia. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17(1):69-82.
18. Wehrli FW, Gomberg BR, Saha PK, et al. Digital topological analysis of in vivo magnetic resonance microimages of trabecular bone reveals structural implications of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2001;16(8): 1520-1531.
19. Hwang SN, Wehrli FW, Williams JL. Probability-based structural parameters from three-dimensional nuclear magnetic resonance images as predictors of trabecular bone strength. Med Phys. 1997;24(8):1255-1261.
20. Benhamou CL, Poupon S, Lespessailles E, et al. Fractal analysis of radiographic trabecular bone texture and bone mineral density: two complementary parameters related to osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res. 2001;16(4):697-704.
21. Rotter M, Berg A, Langenberger H, et al. Autocorrelation analysis of bone structure. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14(1):87-93.
22. Link TM, Majumdar S, Augat P, et al. In vivo high resolution MRI of the calcaneus: differences in trabecular structure in osteoporosis patients. J Bone Miner Res. 1998;13(7):1175-1182.
23. Lin JC, Amling M, Newitt DC, et al. Heterogeneity of trabecular bone structure in the calcaneus using magnetic resonance imaging. Osteoporos Int. 1998;8(1):16-24.
24. Grampp S, Henk CB, Fuerst TP, et al. Diagnostic agreement of quantitative sonography of the calcaneus with dual X-ray absorptiometry of the spine and femur. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(2):329-334.
25. Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1994;843:1-129.
26. Link TM, Vieth V, Matheis J, et al. Bone structure of the distal radius and the calcaneus vs BMD of the spine and proximal femur in the prediction of osteoporotic spine fractures. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(2):401-408.
27. Wehrli FW, Saha PK, Gomberg BR, et al. Role of magnetic resonance for assessing structure and function of trabecular bone. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;13(5):335-355.