title: Hip structural analysis: a comparison of DXA with CT in postmenopausal Japanese women.
abstract: Geometry of the proximal femur is one determinant of fracture risk, and can be analyzed by a simple method using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The aim of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of hip structural analysis (HSA) using clinical data in postmenopausal Japanese women. A total of 184 postmenopausal women aged 51-88 years (mean, 70.5 ± 8.7 years) who underwent artificial joint replacement surgery for osteoarthrosis of the hip or knee joint were included. Computed tomography (CT) data from preoperative assessment were utilized for analysis of proximal femoral geometry (CT-HSA) using QCTPro Software (Mindways Software Inc., Austin, TX) and compared with HSA results based on DXA (DXA-HSA). The results of femoral geometry were further compared with a CT-based finite-element method (CT/FEM). There was moderate to high correlation between DXA-HSA and CT-HSA (r=0.60-0.90, p<0.001), except for the buckling ratio in the intertrochanteric region. Moreover, the correlation of HSA with CT/FEM was similar between DXA-HSA and CT-HSA. The present results suggest that the geometry of proximal femoral cross sections can be reasonably well characterized using DXA.
authors: Department of Radiological Technology, Kawasaki College of Allied Health Professions, 316 Matsushima, Kurashiki, Okayama, 701-0194 Japan.
authors: Kazuhiro
authors: K
authors: Ohnaru
authors: Teruki
authors: T
authors: Sone
authors: Kensuke
authors: K
authors: Tanaka
authors: Kazumi
authors: K
authors: Akagi
authors: Yong-In
authors: YI
authors: Ju
authors: Hak-Jin
authors: HJ
authors: Choi
authors: Tatsushi
authors: T
authors: Tomomitsu
authors: Masao
authors: M
authors: Fukunaga
keywords: Bone strength; CT-based finite-element method; Hip structural analysis; QCT
references: J Bone Miner Metab. 2001;19(6):331-7
references: 11685647
references: J Bone Miner Res. 1989 Oct;4(5):715-22
references: 2816516
references: J Biomech. 1999 Oct;32(10):1013-20
references: 10476839
references: Osteoporos Int. 2012 Feb;23(2):543-51
references: 21394495
references: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Oct;50(10):1644-50
references: 12366617
references: BMJ. 1996 May 18;312(7041):1254-9
references: 8634613
references: J Biomech. 1994 Sep;27(9):1159-68
references: 7929465
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1991 Apr 15;133(8):801-9
references: 2021147
references: J Bone Miner Res. 1994 Jul;9(7):1071-6
references: 7942154
references: BMJ. 1993 Nov 13;307(6914):1248-50
references: 8166806
references: J Bone Miner Res. 2008 Dec;23(12):1892-904
references: 18684092
references: Osteoporos Int. 2013 Apr;24(4):1379-88
references: 22810918
references: Arch Osteoporos. 2009 Dec;4(1-2):71-77
references: 20234789
references: J Biomech. 1998 Feb;31(2):125-33
references: 9593205
references: Med Eng Phys. 2008 Apr;30(3):321-8
references: 17596993
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1996 Nov 1;144(9):901-7
references: 8890668
references: Phys Med Biol. 1999 Mar;44(3):751-64
references: 10211808
references: J Bone Miner Res. 2009 Mar;24(3):475-83
references: 19049327
references: Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2006 Jun;4(2):49-56
references: 16822403
references: JAMA. 2002 Oct 16;288(15):1889-97
references: 12377088
references: Calcif Tissue Int. 2006 Feb;78(2):78-89
references: 16467973
references: Aging Clin Exp Res. 2003 Oct;15(5):426-39
references: 14703009
references: Invest Radiol. 1990 Jan;25(1):6-18
references: 2298552
references: Biomed Mater Eng. 2009;19(4-5):311-6
references: 20042798
references: Osteoporos Int. 2010 Jun;21(6):919-29
references: 19756830
references: Osteoporos Int. 2001;12(3):239-43
references: 11315243
references: J Biomech. 2007;40(8):1745-53
references: 17034798
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1993 May 1;137(9):1001-5
references: 8317445