Clinical Use of Quantitative Computed Tomography-Based Advanced Techniques in the Management of Osteoporosis in Adults: The 2015 ISCD Official Positions-Part III

Journal of Clinical Densitometry

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 393-407

  Engelke, Klaus ^a,b   Lang, Thomas ^c   Khosla, Sundeep ^d   Qin, Ling ^e   Zysset, Philippe ^f   Leslie, William D ^g   Shepherd, John A ^c   Shousboe, John T ^h,i  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^b BioClinica Inc   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d Mayo Clinic   (United States)

^e CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

^h PARK NICOLLET CLINIC   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Asynchronous and internal calibration; Opportunistic screening; Osteoporosis; Quantitative computed tomography (QCT); Statistical parameter mapping (SPM)

Indexed keywords

DENOSUMAB; IOMEPROL; PARATHYROID HORMONE[1-34];

ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DUAL ENERGY X RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HIP FRACTURE; HUMAN; OSTEOPOROSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; SCREENING; ACETABULUM; ADULT; CALIBRATION; COMPLICATION; CONSENSUS; FEMUR; FRACTURES, BONE; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PHOTON ABSORPTIOMETRY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ABSORPTIOMETRY, PHOTON; ACETABULUM; ADULT; BONE DENSITY; CALIBRATION; CONSENSUS; FEMUR; FRACTURES, BONE; HUMANS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MASS SCREENING; OSTEOPOROSIS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84946921487     PISSN: 10946950     EISSN: 15590747     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.06.010     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Majumdar S.R., Leslie W.D. Conventional computed tomography imaging and bone mineral density: opportunistic screening or "incidentaloporosis"?. Ann Intern Med 2013, 158(8):630-631.
2. Cosman F., de Beur S.J., LeBoffM.S., et al. Clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2014, 25(10):2359-2381.
3. Hopper K.D., Wang M.P., Kunselman A.R. The use of clinical CT for baseline bone density assessment. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000, 24(6):896-899.
4. Papadakis A.E., Karantanas A.H., Papadokostakis G., et al. Can abdominal multi-detector CT diagnose spinal osteoporosis?. Eur Radiol 2009, 19(1):172-176.
5. Baum T., Muller D., Dobritz M., et al. Converted lumbar BMD values derived from sagittal reformations of contrast-enhanced MDCT predict incidental osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Calcif Tissue Int 2012, 90(6):481-487.
6. Gruber M., Bauer J.S., Dobritz M., et al. Bone mineral density measurements of the proximal femur from routine contrast-enhanced MDCT data sets correlate with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Eur Radiol 2013, 23(2):505-512.
7. Pickhardt P., Bodeen G., Brett A., et al. Comparison of femoral neck BMD evaluation obtained using lunar DXA and QCT with asynchronous calibration from CT colonography. J Clin Densitom 2014, 18(1):5-12.
8. Summers R.M., Baecher N., Yao J., et al. Feasibility of simultaneous computed tomographic colonography and fully automated bone mineral densitometry in a single examination. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011, 35(2):212-216.
9. Bauer J.S., Henning T.D., Mueller D., et al. Volumetric quantitative CT of the spine and hip derived from contrast-enhanced MDCT: conversion factors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188(5):1294-1301.
10. Pickhardt P.J., Lee L.J., del Rio A.M., et al. Simultaneous screening for osteoporosis at CT colonography: bone mineral density assessment using MDCT attenuation techniques compared with the DXA reference standard. J Bone Miner Res 2011, 26(9):2194-2203.
11. Pickhardt P.J., Pooler B.D., Lauder T., et al. Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using abdominal computed tomography scans obtained for other indications. Ann Intern Med 2013, 158(8):588-595.
12. Emohare O., Cagan A., Polly D.W., et al. Opportunistic computed tomography screening shows a high incidence of osteoporosis in ankylosing spondylitis patients with acute vertebral fractures. J Clin Densitom 2014, 18(1):17-21.
13. Emohare O., Cagan A., Morgan R., et al. The use of computed tomography attenuation to evaluate osteoporosis following acute fractures of the thoracic and lumbar vertebra. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 2014, 5(2):50-55.
14. Boden S.D., Goodenough D.J., Stockham C.D., et al. Precise measurement of vertebral bone density using computed tomography without the use of an external reference phantom. J Digit Imaging 1989, 2(1):31-38.
15. Goodsitt M.M. Conversion relations for quantitative CT bone mineral density measured with solid and liquid calibration standards. Bone Miner 1992, 19:145-158.
16. Mueller D.K., Kutscherenko A., Bartel H., et al. Phantom-less QCT BMD system as screening tool for osteoporosis without additional radiation. Eur J Radiol 2011, 79(3):375-381.
17. Gudmundsdottir H., Jonsdottir B., Kristinsson S., et al. Vertebral bone density in Icelandic women using QCT without use of an external reference phantom. Osteoporos Int 1991, 1:205.
18. Gudmundsdottir H., Jonsdottir B., Kristinsson S., et al. Vertebral bone density in Icelandic women using quantitative computed tomography without an external reference phantom. Osteoporos Int 1993, 3(2):84-89.
19. Engelke K., Mastmeyer A., Bousson V., et al. Reanalysis precision of 3D quantitative computed tomography (QCT) of the spine. Bone 2009, 44(4):566-572.
20. Baum T., Muller D., Dobritz M., et al. BMD measurements of the spine derived from sagittal reformations of contrast-enhanced MDCT without dedicated software. Eur J Radiol 2011, 80(2):e140-e145.
21. Museyko O., Heinemann A., Krause M., et al. A low-radiation exposure protocol for 3D QCT of the spine. Osteoporos Int 2014, 25(3):983-992.
22. Collins D.L., Evans A.C. Animal: validation and applications of non-linear registration-based segmentation. Int J Pattern Recogn 1997, 11:1271-1294.
23. Toga A.W., Thompson P.M. New approaches in brain morphometry. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2002, 10(1):13-23.
24. Li W., Kornak J., Harris T., et al. Identify fracture-critical regions inside the proximal femur using statistical parametric mapping. Bone 2009, 44(4):596-602.
25. Li W, Kornak J, Harris T, et al, Hip Fracture Risk Estimation Based on Principal Component Analysis of QCT Atlas: A Preliminary Study, in Medical Imaging 2009: Biomedical Applications in Molecular, Structural and Biomedical Imaging, X.P. Hu, A.V. Clough, Editors. 2009, [SPIE].
26. Li W., Kornak J., Harris T.B., et al. Bone fracture risk estimation based on image similarity. Bone 2009, 45(3):560-567.
27. Bredbenner T.L., Mason R.L., Havill L.M., et al. Fracture risk predictions based on statistical shape and density modeling of the proximal femur. J Bone Miner Res 2014, 29(9):2090-2100. Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOs) Study.
28. Carballido-Gamio J., Harnish R., Saeed I. Proximal femoral density distribution and structure in relation to age and hip fracture risk in women. J Bone Miner Res 2013, 28(3):537-546.
29. Carballido-Gamio J., Harnish R., Saeed I., et al. Structural patterns of the proximal femur in relation to age and hip fracture risk in women. Bone 2013, 57(1):290-299.
30. Poole K.E., Treece G.M., Mayhew P.M., et al. Cortical thickness mapping to identify focal osteoporosis in patients with hip fracture. PLoS One 2012, 7(6):e38466.
31. Li W., Kezele I., Collins D.L., et al. Voxel-based modeling and quantification of the proximal femur using inter-subject registration of quantitative CT images. Bone 2007, 41(5):888-895.
32. Lang T.F., Saeed I.H., Streeper T., et al. Spatial heterogeneity in the response of the proximal femur to two lower-body resistance exercise regimens. J Bone Miner Res 2013, 29(6):1337-1345.
33. Poole K.E., Treece G.M., Ridgway G.R., et al. Targeted regeneration of bone in the osteoporotic human femur. PLoS One 2011, 6(1):e16190.
34. Poole K.E., Treece G.M., Gee A.H., et al. Denosumab rapidly increases cortical bone in key locations of the femur: a 3D bone mapping study in women with osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 2014, 30(1):46-54.
35. Treece G.M., Gee A.H., Mayhew P.M., et al. High resolution cortical bone thickness measurement from clinical CT data. Med Image Anal 2010, 14(3):276-290.
36. Nicolella D.P., Bredbenner T.L. Development of a parametric finite element model of the proximal femur using statistical shape and density modelling. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2012, 15(2):101-110.
37. Nishiyama K.K., Ito M., Harada A., et al. Classification of women with and without hip fracture based on quantitative computed tomography and finite element analysis. Osteoporos Int 2014, 25(2):619-626.