To use our website in an optimal way, please activate JavaScript in your Browser.

ASBMR, SanDiego, 2011;

Tri-modality comparison of bone structure imaging technologies

Year: 2011

Wong AKO, Beattie KA, Webber CE, Inglis D, Pickard L, Cheung AMW, Gordon CL, Papaioannou A, Adachi JD, the CaMos Research Group
McMaster University, Hamilton, ON; Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton, ON; Teneos Software Incorporated, Hamilton, ON; Depts of Medicine and Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada


bone structural quantification desirable to assess fracture risk, not captured by BMD useful for assessing bone formation agents and abnormalities in structural pathologies achieved primarily by three existing technologies – comparative value unclear
Test-retest reproducibility is higher for BV/TV but also within an acceptable range for Tb.Sp on both pQCT and 1.0T pMRI compared to XtremeCT, and unaffected by BMI
Tb.Sp calibration for 1.0 pMRI is near unity with XtremeCT, and similarly XtremeCT calibration against uCT is near unity
OsteoQ software package provides a means for quantifying porosity that is sensitive to individuals with elaborately developing spaces
LSC for Tb.Sp and BV/TV are smaller for hr-pQCT and requires at least 10% of the mean in terms of difference to be considered clinically significant for pQCT and 1.0 pMRI

GID: 2745; Last update: 21.09.2011