American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 157, 1229-1237, Copyright © 1991 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Noninvasive measurements of bone mass, structure, and strength: current methods and experimental techniques

KG Faulkner, CC Gluer, S Majumdar, P Lang, K Engelke and HK Genant
Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143.

Current methods for assessing osteoporotic fracture risk involve measuring the content and/or density of bone at a number of skeletal sites and relating the measurement to that in either age-matched or young control subjects measured at the same site with the same technique. These densitometric methods have been used to predict several types of fractures; however, engineering principles verify that the bone structure and loading conditions also affect skeletal strength. Many densitometric measurements inherently contain information about skeletal structure and bone distribution, yet this information is not clinically used. In this paper, the currently available techniques for assessing bone content and density, namely, single-photon absorptiometry, dual-photon absorptiometry, dual-energy X- ray absorptiometry, and quantitative CT, and their usefulness in assessing fracture risk and distinguishing between patients with and without osteoporosis are reviewed. Extensions of conventional densitometry that have been developed by several researchers to include information in addition to bone mass also are presented. Results from recent studies using new applications of ultrasound techniques and MR imaging are reviewed. Preliminary studies show the value of these new techniques in noninvasive measurement of bone structure in order to estimate bone strength and assess fracture risk more accurately. However, to become clinically useful, many of these methods require further investigation to increase their ease of use and decrease their cost.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. A. Birnbaum, N. Hindman, J. Lee, and J. S. Babb Multi-Detector Row CT Attenuation Measurements: Assessment of Intra- and Interscanner Variability with an Anthropomorphic Body CT Phantom Radiology, January 1, 2007; 242(1): 109 - 119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D J Chinn, J N Fordham, M S Kibirige, N J Crabtree, J Venables, J Bates, and O Pitcher Bone density at the os calcis: reference values, reproducibility, and effects of fracture history and physical activity Arch. Dis. Child., January 1, 2005; 90(1): 30 - 35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. D. Murray, B. Columb, J. E. Adams, and S. M. Shalet Low Bone Mass Is an Infrequent Feature of the Adult Growth Hormone Deficiency Syndrome in Middle-Age Adults and the Elderly J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2004; 89(3): 1124 - 1130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M Sood, G Hambleton, M Super, W D Fraser, J E Adams, and M Z Mughal Bone status in cystic fibrosis Arch. Dis. Child., June 1, 2001; 84(6): 516 - 520. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				D. Schellinger, C. S. Lin, D. Fertikh, J. S. Lee, W. C. Lauerman, F. Henderson, and B. Davis Normal Lumbar Vertebrae: Anatomic, Age, and Sex Variance in Subjects at Proton MR Spectroscopy-Initial Experience Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 910 - 916. [Abstract] [Full Text]