Pencil-beam vs fan-beam dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry comparisons across four systems: body composition and bone mineral.

We compared bone mineral density (BMD) and body fat percentage (%fat) between two pencil-beam (Lunar DPX and DPX-L) and two fan-beam (Lunar Prodigy, Hologic Delphi A) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) systems. We examined these values in the total-body, spine, femur, and forearm scans in 78 healthy adults across these four DXA systems. BMD and %fat values were highly correlated among the four instruments. DPX-L gave the lowest mean %fat and Prodigy gave the highest mean %fat for both sexes. The means were system dependent for %fat estimates across the four DXA machines. There was a significant difference detected in BMD estimates across manufacturers, with the Delphi A providing systematically lower values than the Lunar systems in the whole body, spine, and femur sites but higher values than the Lunar systems in the forearm. The present study results show that both %fat and bone mineral estimates between pencil-beam and fan-beam systems are highly correlated, but vary by system. Significant differences exist between the instruments, especially between different manufacturers, and most of the comparisons are sex dependent. We conclude that longitudinal studies should always be evaluated on the same system when possible, and translation models should be used to assess cross-instrument differences.

[1]  Glen M. Blake,et al.  Dual X-ray absorptiometry: a comparison between fan beam and pencil beam scans , 1993 .

[2]  Klaus Engelke,et al.  Universal standardization for dual X‐ray absorptiometry: Patient and phantom cross‐calibration results , 1994, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[3]  H. Beck-Nielsen,et al.  Cross calibration of QDR-2000 and QDR-1000 dual-energy X-ray densitometers for bone mineral and soft-tissue measurements. , 1995, Bone.

[4]  I. Cullum,et al.  Cross-calibration of a fan-beam X-ray densitometer with a pencil-beam system. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[5]  S L Hui,et al.  Universal Standardization of Bone Density Measurements: A Method with Optimal Properties for Calibration Among Several Instruments , 1997, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[6]  M. Griffiths,et al.  Correcting the Magnification Error of Fan Beam Densitometers , 1997, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[7]  O. Svendsen,et al.  Body composition analysis by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in female diabetics differ between manufacturers , 1997, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[8]  J. Hanson Standardization of proximal femur BMD measurements. International Committee for Standards in Bone Measurement. , 1997, Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA.

[9]  D. Ducassou,et al.  Comparison of two Hologic DXA systems (QDR 1000 and QDR 4500/A). , 1997, The British journal of radiology.

[10]  G. Blake,et al.  Interpretation of bone densitometry studies. , 1997, Seminars in nuclear medicine.

[11]  K. Ellis,et al.  Bone Mineral and Body Composition Measurements: Cross‐Calibration of Pencil‐Beam and Fan‐Beam Dual‐Energy X‐Ray Absorptiometers , 1998, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[12]  L. Sjöström,et al.  Differences in whole body measurements by DXA-scanning using two Lunar DPX-L machines , 1999, International Journal of Obesity.

[13]  Evaluation of Differences Between Fan-Beam and Pencil-Beam Densitometers , 2000, Calcified Tissue International.

[14]  R. Mazess,et al.  Axial and Total-Body Bone Densitometry Using a Narrow-Angle Fan-Beam , 2000, Osteoporosis International.

[15]  P. Tothill,et al.  Comparisons between a pencil beam and two fan beam dual energy X-ray absorptiometers used for measuring total body bone and soft tissue. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[16]  Ying Lu,et al.  Universal Standardization of Forearm Bone Densitometry , 2002, Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

[17]  B. Oldroyd,et al.  Cross-calibration of GE/Lunar pencil and fan-beam dual energy densitometers—bone mineral density and body composition studies , 2003, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[18]  Comparison of bone mineral density and body composition measurements in women obtained from two DXA instruments , 2003, Mechanisms of Ageing and Development.

[19]  S. Dhaliwal,et al.  Comparison of pencil-beam and fan-beam DXA systems. , 2003, Journal of clinical densitometry : the official journal of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

[20]  Harry K. Genant,et al.  Cross-calibration of DXA equipment: Upgrading from a hologic QDR 1000/W to a QDR 2000 , 1993, Calcified Tissue International.

[21]  M. Munz,et al.  Evaluation of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry bone mineral measurement—comparison of a single-beam and fan-beam design: The effect of osteophytic calcification on spine bone mineral density , 1995, Calcified Tissue International.