Bone mineral density assessment using the EOS® low-dose X-ray device: A feasibility study

To predict bone strength in the case of osteoporosis, it could be a real benefit to assess the three-dimensional (3D) geometry and the bone mineral density (BMD) with a single low-dose X-ray device, such as the EOS system (Biospace Med, Paris, France). EOS 3D reconstructions of the spine have already been validated. Thus, this study aims at evaluating the accuracy of this low-dose system as a densitometer first ex vivo. The European Spine Phantom (ESP) (number 129) was scanned ten times using both the EOS and a Hologic device (Hologic, Inc., Massachusetts, USA). Accuracy was given by the sum of the systematic error (difference between BMDs assessed and true values given by the phantom manufacturer) and the random error (coefficient of variation). EOS BMDs and Hologic BMDs of 41 ex-vivo vertebrae were calculated and compared. The reproducibility of the method evaluating the EOS BMD was assessed giving the coefficient of variation of three measurements of the 41 vertebrae. The accuracy of the EOS system is below 5.2 per cent, versus 7.2 per cent for the Hologic system in the same conditions. EOS BMDs are significantly higher than Hologic BMDs, but they are strongly correlated. The reproducibility of the method of assessment is equal to 0.95 per cent. The EOS system is accurate for ex-vivo BMD assessments, which is promising regarding the use of this new system to predict vertebral strength.

[1]  R. Andresen,et al.  Relationship Between Structural Parameters, Bone Mineral Density and Fracture Load in Lumbar Vertebrae, Based on High-Resolution Computed Tomography, Quantitative Computed Tomography and Compression Tests , 1999, Osteoporosis International.

[2]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Finite Element Modeling of the Human Thoracolumbar Spine , 2003, Spine.

[3]  David Mitton,et al.  Fast accurate stereoradiographic 3D-reconstruction of the spine using a combined geometric and statistic model. , 2004, Clinical biomechanics.

[4]  M. Dougados,et al.  Accuracy and Precision of 62 Bone Densitometers Using a European Spine Phantom , 1999, Osteoporosis International.

[5]  S. Gerlach,et al.  Diagnosis and Therapy , 1981 .

[6]  A. Macovski,et al.  Generalized image combinations in dual KVP digital radiography. , 1981, Medical physics.

[7]  W. Ohley,et al.  Fractal Analysis of Radiographic Trabecular Bone Texture and Bone Mineral Density: Two Complementary Parameters Related to Osteoporotic Fractures , 2001, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[8]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Finite element models predict in vitro vertebral body compressive strength better than quantitative computed tomography. , 2003, Bone.

[9]  F Eckstein,et al.  The osteoporotic vertebral structure is well adapted to the loads of daily life, but not to infrequent "error" loads. , 2004, Bone.

[10]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[11]  Georges Charpak,et al.  Une nouvelle imagerie Ostéo-Articulaire basse dose en position debout : le système EOS , 2005 .

[12]  A. Macovski,et al.  Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerised tomography , 1976, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  J. Buckley,et al.  Comparison of quantitative computed tomography-based measures in predicting vertebral compressive strength. , 2007, Bone.

[14]  Tony M Keaveny,et al.  Quantitative computed tomography-based finite element models of the human lumbar vertebral body: effect of element size on stiffness, damage, and fracture strength predictions. , 2003, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[15]  Harry K. Genant,et al.  Consensus development conference: diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of osteoporosis. , 1993, The American journal of medicine.

[16]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Quantitative computed tomography estimates of the mechanical properties of human vertebral trabecular bone , 2002, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[17]  M. Jergas,et al.  Accurate assessment of precision errors: How to measure the reproducibility of bone densitometry techniques , 2005, Osteoporosis International.