Ellen Margrethe Hauge

Vertebral Bone Mineral Density Measured by Quantitative Computed Tomography With and Without a Calibration Phantom: A Comparison Between 2 Different Software Solutions

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Vertebral Bone Mineral Density Measured by Quantitative Computed Tomography With and Without a Calibration Phantom : A Comparison Between 2 Different Software Solutions. / Therkildsen, Josephine; Thygesen, Jesper; Winther, Simon; Svensson, My; Hauge, Ellen-Margrethe; Böttcher, Morten; Ivarsen, Per; Jørgensen, Hanne Skou.

I: Journal of Clinical Densitometry, Bind 21, Nr. 3, 24.04.2018, s. 367-374.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{3466c59e804444b89cfc21af1293f66e,
title = "Vertebral Bone Mineral Density Measured by Quantitative Computed Tomography With and Without a Calibration Phantom: A Comparison Between 2 Different Software Solutions",
abstract = "Quantitative computed tomography (CT) can be used to quantify bone mineral density (BMD) in the spine from clinical CT scans. We aimed to determine agreement and precision of BMD measurements by 2 different methods: phantom-less internal tissue calibration and asynchronous phantom-based calibration in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Patients with CKD were recruited for CT angiography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. BMD was analyzed by 2 different software solutions using different calibration techniques; phantom-based by QCT Pro (Mindways Inc.) and phantom-less by Extended Brilliance Workspace (Philips Healthcare). Intraoperator reanalysis was performed on 53 patients (36%) for both methods. An interoperator reanalysis on 30 patients (20%) using the phantom-based method and 29 patients (19%) using the phantom-less method was made. XY- and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate method agreement. Phantom-based measured BMD was systematically higher than phantom-less measured BMD. Despite a small absolute difference of 3.3 mg/cm3 (CI: -0.2-6.9 mg/cm3) and a relative difference of 5.1% (CI: 2.2%-8.1%), interindividual differences were large, as seen by a wide prediction interval (PI: -47-40 mg/cm3). The Bland-Altman plot showed no systematic bias, apart from 5 outliers. Intraoperator variability was high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (0.8%) and the interoperator variability was also high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (1.8%). Despite high correlation between methods, the between-method difference on an individual level showed great variability. Our results suggest agreement between these 2 methods is insufficient to allow them to be used interchangeably in patients with CKD.",
author = "Josephine Therkildsen and Jesper Thygesen and Simon Winther and My Svensson and Ellen-Margrethe Hauge and Morten B{\"o}ttcher and Per Ivarsen and J{\o}rgensen, {Hanne Skou}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2018 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2018",
month = apr,
day = "24",
doi = "10.1016/j.jocd.2017.12.003",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "367--374",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Densitometry",
issn = "1094-6950",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Vertebral Bone Mineral Density Measured by Quantitative Computed Tomography With and Without a Calibration Phantom

T2 - A Comparison Between 2 Different Software Solutions

AU - Therkildsen, Josephine

AU - Thygesen, Jesper

AU - Winther, Simon

AU - Svensson, My

AU - Hauge, Ellen-Margrethe

AU - Böttcher, Morten

AU - Ivarsen, Per

AU - Jørgensen, Hanne Skou

N1 - Copyright © 2018 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2018/4/24

Y1 - 2018/4/24

N2 - Quantitative computed tomography (CT) can be used to quantify bone mineral density (BMD) in the spine from clinical CT scans. We aimed to determine agreement and precision of BMD measurements by 2 different methods: phantom-less internal tissue calibration and asynchronous phantom-based calibration in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Patients with CKD were recruited for CT angiography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. BMD was analyzed by 2 different software solutions using different calibration techniques; phantom-based by QCT Pro (Mindways Inc.) and phantom-less by Extended Brilliance Workspace (Philips Healthcare). Intraoperator reanalysis was performed on 53 patients (36%) for both methods. An interoperator reanalysis on 30 patients (20%) using the phantom-based method and 29 patients (19%) using the phantom-less method was made. XY- and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate method agreement. Phantom-based measured BMD was systematically higher than phantom-less measured BMD. Despite a small absolute difference of 3.3 mg/cm3 (CI: -0.2-6.9 mg/cm3) and a relative difference of 5.1% (CI: 2.2%-8.1%), interindividual differences were large, as seen by a wide prediction interval (PI: -47-40 mg/cm3). The Bland-Altman plot showed no systematic bias, apart from 5 outliers. Intraoperator variability was high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (0.8%) and the interoperator variability was also high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (1.8%). Despite high correlation between methods, the between-method difference on an individual level showed great variability. Our results suggest agreement between these 2 methods is insufficient to allow them to be used interchangeably in patients with CKD.

AB - Quantitative computed tomography (CT) can be used to quantify bone mineral density (BMD) in the spine from clinical CT scans. We aimed to determine agreement and precision of BMD measurements by 2 different methods: phantom-less internal tissue calibration and asynchronous phantom-based calibration in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Patients with CKD were recruited for CT angiography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. BMD was analyzed by 2 different software solutions using different calibration techniques; phantom-based by QCT Pro (Mindways Inc.) and phantom-less by Extended Brilliance Workspace (Philips Healthcare). Intraoperator reanalysis was performed on 53 patients (36%) for both methods. An interoperator reanalysis on 30 patients (20%) using the phantom-based method and 29 patients (19%) using the phantom-less method was made. XY- and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate method agreement. Phantom-based measured BMD was systematically higher than phantom-less measured BMD. Despite a small absolute difference of 3.3 mg/cm3 (CI: -0.2-6.9 mg/cm3) and a relative difference of 5.1% (CI: 2.2%-8.1%), interindividual differences were large, as seen by a wide prediction interval (PI: -47-40 mg/cm3). The Bland-Altman plot showed no systematic bias, apart from 5 outliers. Intraoperator variability was high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (0.8%) and the interoperator variability was also high for the phantom-less method (5.8%) compared to the phantom-based (1.8%). Despite high correlation between methods, the between-method difference on an individual level showed great variability. Our results suggest agreement between these 2 methods is insufficient to allow them to be used interchangeably in patients with CKD.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jocd.2017.12.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jocd.2017.12.003

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29680671

VL - 21

SP - 367

EP - 374

JO - Journal of Clinical Densitometry

JF - Journal of Clinical Densitometry

SN - 1094-6950

IS - 3

ER -