Engelke, Klaus

ABSTRACT Opportunistic screening is a new promising technique to identify individuals at high risk for osteoporotic fracture using computed tomography (CT) scans originally acquired for an clinical purpose unrelated to osteoporosis. In these CT scans, a calibration phantom traditionally required to convert measured CT values to bone mineral density (BMD) is missing. As an alternative, phantomless calibration has been developed. This study aimed to review the principles of four existing phantomless calibration methods and to compare their performance against the gold standard of simultaneous calibration (ΔBMD). All methods were applied to a dataset of 350 females scanned with a highly standardized CT protocol (DS1) and to a second dataset of 114 patients (38 female) from clinical routine covering a large range of CT acquisition and reconstruction parameters (DS2). Three of the phantomless calibration methods must be precalibrated with a reference dataset containing a calibration phantom. Sixty scans from DS1 and 57 from DS2 were randomly selected for this precalibration. For each phantomless calibration method first the best combination of internal reference materials (IMs) was selected. These were either air and blood or subcutaneous adipose tissue, blood, and cortical bone. In addition, for phantomless calibration a fifth method based on average calibration parameters derived from the reference dataset was applied. For DS1, ΔBMD results (mean ± standard deviation) for the phantomless calibration methods requiring a precalibration ranged from 0.1 ± 2.7 mg/cm3 to 2.4 ± 3.5 mg/cm3 with similar means but significantly higher standard deviations for DS2. Performance of the phantomless calibration method, which does not require a precalibration was worse (ΔBMD DS1: 12.6 ± 13.2 mg/cm3, DS2: 0.5 ± 8.8 mg/cm3). In conclusion, phantomless BMD calibration performs well if precalibrated with a reference dataset. © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Abstract High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) has recently been introduced as a clinical research tool for in vivo assessment of bone quality. The utility of this technology to address important skeletal health questions requires translation to standardized multicenter data pools. Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility of pooling data in multicenter HR-pQCT imaging trials. Reproducibility imaging experiments were performed using structure and composition-realistic phantoms constructed from cadaveric radii. Single-center precision was determined by repeat scanning over short-term (<72 hours), intermediate-term (3–5 months), and long-term intervals (28 months). Multicenter precision was determined by imaging the phantoms at nine different HR-pQCT centers. Least significant change (LSC) and root mean squared coefficient of variation (RMSCV) for each interval and across centers was calculated for bone density, geometry, microstructure, and biomechanical parameters. Single-center short-term RMSCVs were <1% for all parameters except cortical thickness (Ct.Th) (1.1%), spatial variability in cortical thickness (Ct.Th.SD) (2.6%), standard deviation of trabecular separation (Tb.Sp.SD) (1.8%), and porosity measures (6% to 8%). Intermediate-term RMSCVs were generally not statistically different from short-term values. Long-term variability was significantly greater for all density measures (0.7% to 2.0%; p < 0.05 versus short-term) and several structure measures: cortical thickness (Ct.Th) (3.4%; p < 0.01 versus short-term), cortical porosity (Ct.Po) (15.4%; p < 0.01 versus short-term), and trabecular thickness (Tb.Th) (2.2%; p < 0.01 versus short-term). Multicenter RMSCVs were also significantly higher than short-term values: 2% to 4% for density and micro–finite element analysis (µFE) measures (p < 0.0001), 2.6% to 5.3% for morphometric measures (p < 0.001), whereas Ct.Po was 16.2% (p < 0.001). In the absence of subject motion, multicenter precision errors for HR-pQCT parameters were generally less than 5%. Phantom-based multicenter precision was comparable to previously reported in in vivo single-center precision errors, although this was approximately two to five times worse than ex vivo short-term precision. The data generated from this study will contribute to the future design and validation of standardized procedures that are broadly translatable to multicenter study designs. © 2013 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.