Cargando…

Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects

INTRODUCTION: Phantom-based (synchronous and asynchronous) and phantomless (internal tissue calibration based) assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) in routine MDCT (multidetector computed tomography) examinations potentially allows for diagnosis of osteoporosis. Although recent studies investiga...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kaesmacher, Johannes, Liebl, Hans, Baum, Thomas, Kirschke, Jan Stefan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5359785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27798444
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000518
_version_ 1782516446876663808
author Kaesmacher, Johannes
Liebl, Hans
Baum, Thomas
Kirschke, Jan Stefan
author_facet Kaesmacher, Johannes
Liebl, Hans
Baum, Thomas
Kirschke, Jan Stefan
author_sort Kaesmacher, Johannes
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Phantom-based (synchronous and asynchronous) and phantomless (internal tissue calibration based) assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) in routine MDCT (multidetector computed tomography) examinations potentially allows for diagnosis of osteoporosis. Although recent studies investigated the effects of contrast-medium application on phantom-calibrated BMD measurements, it remains uncertain to what extent internal tissue-calibrated BMD measurements are also susceptible to contrast-medium associated density variation. The present study is the first to systemically evaluate BMD variations related to contrast application comparing different calibration techniques. PURPOSE: To compare predicative performance of different calibration techniques for BMD measurements obtained from triphasic contrast-enhanced MDCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bone mineral density was measured on nonenhanced (NE), arterial (AR) and portal-venous (PV) contrast phase MDCT images of 46 patients using synchronous (SYNC) and asynchronous (ASYNC) phantom calibration as well as internal calibration (IC). Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) served as criterion standard. Density variations were analyzed for each contrast phase and calibration technique, and respective linear fitting was performed. RESULTS: Both asynchronous calibration-derived BMD values (NE-ASYNC) and values estimated using IC (NE-IC) on NE MDCT images did reasonably well in predicting QCT BMD (root-mean-square deviation, 8.0% and 7.8%, respectively). Average NE-IC BMD was 2.7% lower when compared with QCT (P = 0.017), whereas no difference could be found for NE-ASYNC (P = 0.957). All average BMD estimates derived from contrast-enhanced scans differed significantly from QCT BMD (all P < 0.005) and led to notable systemic BMD biases (mean difference at least > 6.0 mg/mL). All regression fits revealed a consistent linear dependency (R(2) range, 0.861–0.963). Overall accuracy and goodness of fit tended to decrease from AR to PV contrast phase. Highest precision and best linear fit could be reached using a synchronously scanned phantom (root-mean-square deviation, 9.4% for AR and 14.4% for PV). Both ASYNC and IC estimations performed comparably accurate and precise. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that internal calibration driven BMD measurements derived from contrast-enhanced MDCT need the same amount of post hoc contrast-effect adjustment as measurements using phantom calibration. Adjustment using linear correction equations can correct for systematic bias of bone density variations related to contrast application, irrespective of the calibration technique used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5359785
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53597852017-03-28 Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects Kaesmacher, Johannes Liebl, Hans Baum, Thomas Kirschke, Jan Stefan J Comput Assist Tomogr Musculoskeletal Radiology INTRODUCTION: Phantom-based (synchronous and asynchronous) and phantomless (internal tissue calibration based) assessment of bone mineral density (BMD) in routine MDCT (multidetector computed tomography) examinations potentially allows for diagnosis of osteoporosis. Although recent studies investigated the effects of contrast-medium application on phantom-calibrated BMD measurements, it remains uncertain to what extent internal tissue-calibrated BMD measurements are also susceptible to contrast-medium associated density variation. The present study is the first to systemically evaluate BMD variations related to contrast application comparing different calibration techniques. PURPOSE: To compare predicative performance of different calibration techniques for BMD measurements obtained from triphasic contrast-enhanced MDCT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Bone mineral density was measured on nonenhanced (NE), arterial (AR) and portal-venous (PV) contrast phase MDCT images of 46 patients using synchronous (SYNC) and asynchronous (ASYNC) phantom calibration as well as internal calibration (IC). Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) served as criterion standard. Density variations were analyzed for each contrast phase and calibration technique, and respective linear fitting was performed. RESULTS: Both asynchronous calibration-derived BMD values (NE-ASYNC) and values estimated using IC (NE-IC) on NE MDCT images did reasonably well in predicting QCT BMD (root-mean-square deviation, 8.0% and 7.8%, respectively). Average NE-IC BMD was 2.7% lower when compared with QCT (P = 0.017), whereas no difference could be found for NE-ASYNC (P = 0.957). All average BMD estimates derived from contrast-enhanced scans differed significantly from QCT BMD (all P < 0.005) and led to notable systemic BMD biases (mean difference at least > 6.0 mg/mL). All regression fits revealed a consistent linear dependency (R(2) range, 0.861–0.963). Overall accuracy and goodness of fit tended to decrease from AR to PV contrast phase. Highest precision and best linear fit could be reached using a synchronously scanned phantom (root-mean-square deviation, 9.4% for AR and 14.4% for PV). Both ASYNC and IC estimations performed comparably accurate and precise. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that internal calibration driven BMD measurements derived from contrast-enhanced MDCT need the same amount of post hoc contrast-effect adjustment as measurements using phantom calibration. Adjustment using linear correction equations can correct for systematic bias of bone density variations related to contrast application, irrespective of the calibration technique used. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-03 2017-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5359785/ /pubmed/27798444 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000518 Text en Copyright © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Musculoskeletal Radiology
Kaesmacher, Johannes
Liebl, Hans
Baum, Thomas
Kirschke, Jan Stefan
Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title_full Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title_fullStr Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title_full_unstemmed Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title_short Bone Mineral Density Estimations From Routine Multidetector Computed Tomography: A Comparative Study of Contrast and Calibration Effects
title_sort bone mineral density estimations from routine multidetector computed tomography: a comparative study of contrast and calibration effects
topic Musculoskeletal Radiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5359785/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27798444
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000518
work_keys_str_mv AT kaesmacherjohannes bonemineraldensityestimationsfromroutinemultidetectorcomputedtomographyacomparativestudyofcontrastandcalibrationeffects
AT lieblhans bonemineraldensityestimationsfromroutinemultidetectorcomputedtomographyacomparativestudyofcontrastandcalibrationeffects
AT baumthomas bonemineraldensityestimationsfromroutinemultidetectorcomputedtomographyacomparativestudyofcontrastandcalibrationeffects
AT kirschkejanstefan bonemineraldensityestimationsfromroutinemultidetectorcomputedtomographyacomparativestudyofcontrastandcalibrationeffects