Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
OtherCONTINUING EDUCATION

Different Approaches to Bone Densitometry*

Ignac Fogelman and Glen M. Blake
Journal of Nuclear Medicine December 2000, 41 (12) 2015-2025;
Ignac Fogelman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Glen M. Blake
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Gradient-of-risk relationship between bone density and fracture risk. Bone density is plotted in T-score units relative to mean and SD of healthy young adult population. WHO definitions of osteoporosis, osteopenia, and “normal” are intended to identify patients at high, intermediate, and low risks of fracture. In this figure, a decrease in T-score by 1 unit increases fracture risk by a factor of 2.5. This approximates to relationship between hip BMD and hip-fracture risk (see Figure 2).

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    RR values for fractures at different skeletal sites for bone density measurements in spine, calcaneus, distal radius, midradius, and hip. RR is defined as increased risk of fracture for a 1-SD decrease in BMD. Data are taken from meta-analysis of prospective studies collated by Marshall et al. (24).

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    (A) QDR4500 fanbeam DXA scanner (Hologic, Bedford, MA). Densitometers such as this are most frequently used for measuring spine and hip BMD but can also be used for total body, forearm, and lateral projection studies of the spine. (B) Portion of computer printout from DXA scan of the spine. Printout shows (clockwise from left): scan image of lumbar spine; patient's age and BMD plotted with respect to the reference range; and BMD figures for individual vertebrae and total spine (L1–L4) with interpretation in terms of T-scores and Z-scores. (C) Portion of computer printout from a DXA scan of the hip. Printout shows (clockwise from left): scan image of proximal femur; patient's age and BMD for the total femur ROI plotted with respect to the NHANES III reference range; and BMD figures for 5 ROIs in hip (femoral neck, greater trochanter, intertrochanteric, total femur, and Ward's triangle) together with interpretation in terms of T-scores and Z-scores using the NHANES III reference range.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    Portion of computer printout from spinal QCT scan showing transverse, sagittal, and coronal images of 2 lumbar vertebrae. The study was analyzed using commercially available QCT software package (Mindways Software, San Francisco, CA).

  • FIGURE 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 5.

    Computer printout from pDXA scan of distal forearm. Scan was performed on DTX-200 system (Osteometer Meditech, Hawthorne, CA).

  • FIGURE 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 6.

    Achilles system for performing QUS measurements in the heel (Lunar Corp., Madison, WI). Devices such as this measure BUA and SOS in calcaneus. The 2 measurements are combined into 1 index (“Stiffness”), which is supposed to improve discrimination compared with BUA or SOS alone.

  • FIGURE 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 7.

    Physical principles behind measurement of BUA and SOS. (A) Received pulse is digitized, and fourier analysis used to determine the power spectrum. Pulse transit time is used for SOS measurement. (B) Power spectrum of signal transmitted through patient's heel is compared with reference trace from signal transmitted through water. Difference between the 2 traces represents attenuation from patient's heel. (C) When attenuation through patient's heel is plotted against frequency, linear relationship is found at frequencies less than 1 MHz. BUA is defined as slope of regression line and is measured in units of dB/MHz.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1.

    Characteristics of Different Bone Densitometry Techniques

    TechniqueRegions of interestUnits reportedPrecision (%CV)Effective dose (μSv)
    DXAPA spineBMD (g/cm2)1% 1–10
    Proximal femur1%–2% 1–10
    Total body1%3
    QCTSpineBMD (g/cm3)3% 50–500
    pDXAForearmBMD (g/cm2)1%–2%0.1
    Calcaneus1%–2%0.1
    pQCTForearmBMD (g/cm3)1%–2%1–3
    RAPhalanxBMD (g/cm2)1%–2%10
    QUSCalcaneusBUA (dB/MHz)2%–5%None
    CalcaneusSOS (m/s)0.1%–1%None
    TibiaSOS (m/s)1%–2%None
    MultisiteSOS (m/s)1%–2%None
    • PA = posteroanterior; BUA = broadband ultrasonic attenuation; SOS = speed of sound.

    • View popup
    TABLE 2.

    Risk Factors for Osteoporosis, Additional to Age and BMD, Incorporated in the NOF Guidelines for Therapeutic Intervention

    • History of fracture after age 40.
    • History of hip, wrist, or vertebral fracture in a first-degree relative.
    • Being in lowest quartile for body weight (≤57.8 kg [127 lb]).
    • Current cigarette smoking habit.
    • Data from NOF guidelines (57,59).

    • View popup
    TABLE 3.

    Risk Factors Providing Indications for the Diagnostic Use of Bone Densitometry

    CategoryRisk factor
    Presence of strong risk factorsEstrogen deficiency
     Premature menopause (age <45 y)
     Prolonged secondary amenorrhea (>1 y)
     Primary hypogonadism
    Corticosteroid therapy
     Prednisolone >7.5 mg/day for 1 y or more
    Maternal family history of hip fracture
    Low body mass index (<19 kg/m2)
    Other disorders associated with osteoporosis
     Anorexia nervosa
     Malabsorption syndrome
     Primary hyperparathyroidism
     Post-transplantation
     Chronic renal failure
     Hyperthyroidism
     Prolonged immobilization
     Cushing's syndrome
    Radiographic evidence of osteopenia or vertebral deformity
    Previous fragility fracture, especially of the hip, spine, or wrist
    Loss of height, thoracic kyphosis (after radiographic confirmation of vertebral deformities)
    • Data from RCP guidelines (58).

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 41, Issue 12
December 1, 2000
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Different Approaches to Bone Densitometry*
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Different Approaches to Bone Densitometry*
Ignac Fogelman, Glen M. Blake
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2000, 41 (12) 2015-2025;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Different Approaches to Bone Densitometry*
Ignac Fogelman, Glen M. Blake
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Dec 2000, 41 (12) 2015-2025;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • THE DEFINITION OF OSTEOPOROSIS
    • DEFINITION OF OSTEOPOROSIS USING BONE MINERAL DENSITY
    • TECHNIQUES AVAILABLE FOR BONE DENSITOMETRY
    • RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BONE MEASUREMENT SITES
    • REFERENCE RANGES
    • CLINICAL DECISION MAKING
    • SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Treatment of acromegaly increases BMD but reduces trabecular bone score: a longitudinal study
  • Effect of 10% formalin on radiographic optical density of bone specimens
  • The role of DXA bone density scans in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Approaches to Imaging Immune Activation Using PET
  • Large Language Models and Large Multimodal Models in Medical Imaging: A Primer for Physicians
  • Precision Oncology in Melanoma: Changing Practices
Show more Continuing Education

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire