Skip to main content
Log in

Replacing DXA scanners: Cross-calibration with phantoms may be misleading

Calcified Tissue International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The high precision and stable calibration of dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has led to its widespread use in clinical trials of new therapies for osteoporosis. Daily scanning of phantoms provides a check on the continuity of the bone mineral density (BMD) calibration and allows for correction of minor changes. However, because clinical trials may last up to 5 years, it is likely that the scanner will need replacing during the course of a study. We report the upgrade of a Hologic QDR-2000 to a QDR-2000plus. The new scanner was cross-calibrated with the old according to the manufacturer’s instructions using the Hologic spine phantom. The accuracy of cross-calibration was checked byin vivo scans of patients in clinical trials and also using the European spine phantom (ESP). Daily QC scans with the Hologic phantom over the 6-week period of thein vivo study showed that the new scanner agreed within 0.2% with the old. However,in vivo scans at 10 sites in the spine, hip, total body, and forearm showed significant mismatch between the two systems with five sites differing by more than 2%. Results for the ESP phantom lay closer to thein vivo spine data than the Hologic phantom. The mismatch revealed was larger than anticipated and emphasized the importance of performing adequatein vivo cross-calibration studies whenever DXA systems are replaced. Typically, scans of 20–30 subjects are required at each scan site to achieve an accuracy of 1%. Such studies require careful planning and make significant demands on space, patient cooperation, scanning time, scientific resources, and, not least, the implementation of the findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Stein JA, Lazewatsky JL, Hochberg AM(1987) Dual-energy x-ray bone densitometer incorporating an internal reference system. Radiology 165(suppl):313

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wahner HW, Dunn WL, Brown ML, Morin RL, Riggs BL (1988) Comparison of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and dual photon absorptiometry for bone mineral measurements of the lumbar spine. Mayo Clin Proc 63:1075–1084

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Orwoll ES, Oviatt SK (1991) Longitudinal precision of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in a multicenter study. J Bone Miner Res 6:191–197

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wahner HW, Fogelman I (1994) The evaluation of osteoporosis: dual energy x-ray absorptiometry in clinical practice. Martin Dunitz, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Glüer C-C, Faulkner KG, Estilo MJ, Engelke K, Rosin J, Genant HK (1993) Quality assurance for bone densitometry research studies: concept and impact. Osteoporosis Int 3:227–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Faulkner KG, McClung MR (1995) Quality control of DXA instruments in multicentre trials. Osteoporosis Int 5:218–227

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cummings SR, Black DM, Nevitt MC, Browner W, Cauley J, Ensrud K, Genant HK, Palermo L, Scott J, Vogt TM (1993) Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures. Lancet 341:72–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Laskey MA, Flaxman ME, Barber RW, Trafford S, Hayball MP, Lyttle KD, Crisp AJ, Compston JE (1991) Comparative performance in vitro and in vivo of Lunar DPX and Hologic QDR-1000 dual energy x-ray absorptiometers. Br J Radiol 64:1023–1029

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Faulkner KG, Glüer C-C, Estilo M, Genant HK (1993) Cross-calibration of DXA equipment: upgrading from a Hologic QDR-1000/W to a QDR-2000. Calcif Tissue Int 52:79–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kelly TL, Slovik DM, Neer RM (1989) Calibration and standardization of bone mineral densitometers. J Bone Miner Res 4:663–669

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Blake GM, Parker JC, Buxton FMA, Fogelman I (1993) Dual x-ray absorptiometry: a comparison between fan beam and pencil beam scans. Br J Radiol 66:902–906

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kalender WA, Felsenberg D, Genant HK, Fischer M, Dequeker J, Reeve J (1995) The European Spine Phantom-a tool for standardization and quality control in spinal bone mineral measurements by DXA and QCT. Eur J Radiol 20: 83–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Genant HK, Grampp S, Glüer C-C, Faulkner KG, Jergas M, Engelke K, Hagiwara S, van Kuijk C (1994) Universal standardization for dual x-ray absorptiometry: patient and phantom cross-calibration. J Bone Miner Res 9:1503–1514

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Harper KD, Lobaugh B, King ST, Drezner MK (1992) Upgrading dual energy x-ray absortiometry scanners: Do new models provide equivalent results? J Bone Miner Res 7(suppl):S191

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eiken P, Bärenholdt O, Bjorn Jensen L, Gram J, Pors Nielsen S (1994) Switching from DXA pencil-beam to fan beam. I: studies in vitro in four centers. Bone 15:667–670

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Eiken P, Kolthoff N, Bärenholdt O, Hermansen F, Pors Nielsen S (1994) Switching from DXA pencil-beam to fanbeam. II: studies in vivo. Bone 15:671–676

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Finkelstein JS, Butler JP, Cleary RL, Neer RM (1994) Comparison of four methods for cross-calibrating dual-energy x-ray absorptiometers to eliminate systematic errors when upgrading equipment. J Bone Miner Res 9:1945–1952

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Blake GM, Fogelman I (1995) Replacing dual x-ray absorptiometry scanners: cross-calibration of a new multidetector array system. J Bone Miner Res 10(suppl):S267

    Google Scholar 

  19. Prince R, Price R, Gutteridge D, Retallack R, Dick I, Lemmon J, Hall S, LeDain S (1995) Comparison of bone mineral density measurement between the Hologic QDR2000 and the QDR4500A. J Bone Miner Res 10(suppl):S272

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fuerst T, Glüer C-C, Genant HK (1995) Performance evaluation of a new bone densitometer: Hologic QDR-4500. J Bone Miner Res 10(suppl):S370

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nord RH, Payne RK (1990) Standards for body composition calibration in DEXA. In: Ring EFJ (ed) Current research in osteoporosis and bone mineral measurement. British Institute of Radiology, London, pp 27–28

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blake, G.M. Replacing DXA scanners: Cross-calibration with phantoms may be misleading. Calcif Tissue Int 59, 1–5 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002239900075

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002239900075

Key words

Navigation