Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Volume 10, Issue 3 , Pages 306-311, July 2007

Cross Calibration of Hologic QDR2000 and GE Lunar Prodigy for Forearm Bone Mineral Density Measurements

  • D. Pearson

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medical Physics & Clinical Engineering, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Derek Pearson, Medical Physics & Clinical Engineering, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, City Hospital Campus, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, United Kingdom.
  • ,
  • B. Horton

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
  • ,
  • D.J. Green

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK

Received 1 February 2006; received in revised form 26 April 2007; accepted 14 May 2007. published online 22 June 2007.

Abstract 

The purpose of this study was to carry out an in vivo cross calibration for forearm bone mineral density (BMD) between a Hologic QDR2000 (Hologic Inc., Bedford MA, USA) and Lunar Prodigy (GE Healthcare, Madison WI, USA) during equipment upgrade. Nineteen subjects (17 females and 2 males, mean age 57yr, range: 42–79yr) attending for routine dual energy X-ray absorptiometry scanning were recruited. BMD of the nondominant forearm was measured on both instruments. Cross-calibration equations were derived for total forearm, ultradistal radius and ulna, and 33% radius and ulna. A Bland & Altman plot was used to calculate the mean difference and limits of agreement between instruments. There were significant differences in BMD at all sites. The Prodigy BMD was 15% higher at the total forearm and 20–25% higher in the cortical regions of the 33% ulna and 33% radius. The differences are smaller in the ultradistal regions, as it appears that the Prodigy underestimates BMD at low BMD. The standard error of estimate about the cross calibration was such that it cannot be used to transfer individual patients between instruments, but could be applied to clinical trial data.

Key Words: BMD, calibration, DXA, forearm

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1094-6950(07)00174-6

doi:10.1016/j.jocd.2007.05.003

Refers to erratum:

  • Erratum

    Journal of Clinical Densitometry January 2008 (Vol. 11, Issue 1, Page 207)

Journal of Clinical Densitometry
Volume 10, Issue 3 , Pages 306-311, July 2007