Comparison of Six Calcaneal Quantitative Ultrasound Devices: Precision and Hip Fracture Discrimination

Abstract: Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) is now accepted as a useful tool in the management of osteoporosis. There are a variety of QUS devices clinically available with a number of differences among them, including their coupling methods, parameter calculation algorithms and sites of measurement. This study evaluated the abilities of six calcaneal QUS devices to discriminate between normal and hip-fractured subjects compared with the established method of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The short-term and mid-term precisions of these devices were also determined. Thirty-five women (mean age 74.5 ± 7.9 years) who had sustained a hip fracture within the past 3 years, and 35 age-matched controls (75.8 ± 5.6 years) were recruited. Ultrasound measurements were acquired using six ultrasound devices: three gel-coupled and three water-coupled devices. Bone mineral density was measured at the hip using DXA. Discrimination of fracture patients versus controls was assessed using logistic regression analysis (expressed as age- and BMI-adjusted odds ratios per standard deviation decrease with 95% confidence interval) and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. Measurement precision was standardized to the biological range (sCV). The sCV ranged from 3.14% to 5.5% for speed of sound (SOS) and from 2.45% to 6.01% for broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA). The standardized medium-term precision ranged from 4.33% to 8.43% for SOS and from 2.77% to 6.91% for BUA. The pairwise Pearson correlation coefficients between different devices was highly significant (SOS, r= 0.79–0.93; BUA, r= 0.71–0.92). QUS variables correlated weakly, though significantly, with femoral BMD (SOS, r= 0.30–0.55; BUA, r= 0.35–0.61). The absolute BUA and SOS values varied among devices. The gel-coupled devices generally had a higher SOS than water-coupled devices. Bone mineral density (BMD) and BUA were weakly correlated with weight (r= 0.48–0.57 for BMD and r= 0.18–0.54 for BUA), whereas SOS was independent of weight. All the QUS devices gave similar, statistically significant hip fracture discrimination for both SOS and BUA measures. The odds ratios for SOS (2.1–2.8) and BUA (2.4–3.4) were comparable to those for femoral BMD (2.6–3.5), as were the area under the curve (SOS, 0.65–0.71; BUA, 0.62–0.71; BMD, 0.65–0.74) from ROC analysis. Within the limitation of the sample size all devices show similar diagnostic sensitivity.

[1]  M. Reznikoff,et al.  Bootstrapping: a tool for clinical research. , 1990, Journal of clinical psychology.

[2]  L. Rosenthall Influence of Bone Quality on Precision of Calcaneal Ultrasonometry , 1997, Calcified Tissue International.

[3]  T A Einhorn,et al.  Are the etiologies of cervical and trochanteric hip fractures different? , 1996, Bone.

[4]  G Berger,et al.  In vitro assessment of the relationship between acoustic properties and bone mass density of the calcaneus by comparison of ultrasound parametric imaging and quantitative computed tomography. , 1997, Bone.

[5]  J. Cauley,et al.  Broadband ultrasound attenuation predicts fractures strongly and independently of densitometry in older women. A prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. , 1997, Archives of Internal Medicine.

[6]  G M Owen,et al.  Factors affecting the in vivo precision of broad-band ultrasonic attenuation. , 1995, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  K. Wear,et al.  Measurements of phase velocity and group velocity in human calcaneus. , 2000, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[8]  H K Genant,et al.  Assessment of bone mineral at appendicular sites in females with fractures of the proximal femur. , 1998, Bone.

[9]  J. Kanis,et al.  Short-term Reproducibility of Proximal Femur Bone Mineral Density in the Elderly , 1998, Calcified Tissue International.

[10]  P. Rich,et al.  Water Bath and Contact Methods in Ultrasonic Evaluation of Bone , 1997, Calcified Tissue International.

[11]  J. Hanley,et al.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. , 1983, Radiology.

[12]  J. Cunningham,et al.  Ultrasound velocity and attenuation at different skeletal sites compared with bone mineral density measured using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  S. Majumdar,et al.  Noninvasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: State of the art , 1996, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[14]  E. Orwoll,et al.  Precision and Discriminatory Ability of Calcaneal Bone Assessment Technologies , 1997, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[15]  J. Li,et al.  An evaluation of a new gel-coupled ultrasound device for the quantitative assessment of bone. , 1999, The British journal of radiology.

[16]  P. Laugier,et al.  Ultrasound Measurement on the Calcaneus: Influence of Immersion Time and Rotation of the Foot , 1999, Osteoporosis International.

[17]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[18]  F. Tylavsky,et al.  Utility of Ultrasound to Assess Risk of Fracture , 1997, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[19]  H. Genant,et al.  Quantitative ultrasound. , 1995, European journal of radiology.

[20]  W. Hayes,et al.  Trochanteric bone mineral density is associated with type of hip fracture in the elderly , 1994, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[21]  G. Blake,et al.  Technical principles of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. , 1997, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[22]  C C Glüer,et al.  Comparisons of Noninvasive Bone Mineral Measurements in Assessing Age‐Related Loss, Fracture Discrimination, and Diagnostic Classification , 1997, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[23]  J. Swets,et al.  Assessment of diagnostic technologies. , 1979, Science.

[24]  C. Glüer,et al.  Quantitative Ultrasound Techniques for the Assessment of Osteoporosis: Expert Agreement on Current Status , 1997, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[25]  J. R. Koehler,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics with S-Plus. , 1996 .

[26]  S. Cummings,et al.  Bone density at various sites for prediction of hip fractures , 1993, The Lancet.

[27]  G. Breart,et al.  Ultrasonographic heel measurements to predict hip fracture in elderly women: the EPIDOS prospective study , 1996, The Lancet.

[28]  P W Thompson,et al.  Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) of the heel predicts wrist and osteoporosis-related fractures in women age 45-75 years. , 1998, Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

[29]  H. Genant,et al.  Quantitative ultrasound in bone status assessment. , 1998, Revue du rhumatisme.

[30]  M. Jergas,et al.  Quantitative CT assessment of the lumbar spine and radius in patients with osteoporosis. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[31]  M. Munz,et al.  Bone Mineral Density of Opposing Hips Using Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Single-Beam and Fan-Beam Design , 1997, Calcified Tissue International.

[32]  R. Speller,et al.  Comparison of ultrasound and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements in the calcaneus. , 1998, The British journal of radiology.

[33]  H. Genant,et al.  Factors Affecting Broadband Ultrasound Attenuation Results of the Calcaneus Using a Gel-Coupled Quantitative Ultrasound Scanning System , 1999, Osteoporosis International.

[34]  L. Bouter,et al.  The Influence of Physical Activity and Fractures on Ultrasound Parameters in Elderly People , 1998, Osteoporosis International.

[35]  G Van der Perre,et al.  A comparison of time-domain and frequency-domain approaches to ultrasonic velocity measurement in trabecular bone. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[36]  C C Glüer,et al.  Monitoring Skeletal Changes by Radiological Techniques , 1999, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[37]  S. Johansson,et al.  Calcaneal ultrasound measurements are determined by age and physical activity. Studies in two Swedish random population samples , 2000, Journal of Internal Medicine.