Premium
Analysis of Proximal Femur DXA Scans in Growing Children: Comparisons of Different Protocols for Cross‐Sectional 8‐Month and 7‐Year Longitudinal Data
Author(s) -
McKay H. A.,
Petit M. A.,
Bailey D. A.,
Wallace W. M.,
Schutz R. W.,
Khan K. M.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
journal of bone and mineral research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.882
H-Index - 241
eISSN - 1523-4681
pISSN - 0884-0431
DOI - 10.1359/jbmr.2000.15.6.1181
Subject(s) - femur , femoral neck , medicine , bone mineral , bone mineral content , skeleton (computer programming) , nuclear medicine , region of interest , dual energy x ray absorptiometry , dual energy , osteoporosis , radiology , anatomy , surgery
Dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA) is a widely used method for measuring bone mineral in the growing skeleton. Because scan analysis in children offers a number of challenges, we compared DXA results using six analysis methods at the total proximal femur (PF) and five methods at the femoral neck (FN). In total we assessed 50 scans (25 boys, 25 girls) from two separate studies for cross‐sectional differences in bone area, bone mineral content (BMC), and areal bone mineral density ( a BMD) and for percentage change over the short term (8 months) and long term (7 years). At the proximal femur for the short‐term longitudinal analysis, there was an approximate 3.5% greater change in bone area and BMC when the global region of interest (ROI) was allowed to increase in size between years as compared with when the global ROI was held constant. Trend analysis showed a significant ( p < 0.05) difference between scan analysis methods for bone area and BMC across 7 years. At the femoral neck, cross‐sectional analysis using a narrower (from default) ROI, without change in location, resulted in a 12.9 and 12.6% smaller bone area and BMC, respectively (both p < 0.001). Changes in FN area and BMC over 8 months were significantly greater (2.3%, p < 0.05) using a narrower FN rather than the default ROI. Similarly, the 7‐year longitudinal data revealed that differences between scan analysis methods were greatest when the narrower FN ROI was maintained across all years ( p < 0.001). For a BMD there were no significant differences in group means between analysis methods at either the PF or FN. Our findings show the need to standardize the analysis of proximal femur DXA scans in growing children.