Riemer H J A Slart, Marija Punda, Dalal S Ali, Alberto Bazzocchi, Oliver Bock, Pauline Camacho, John J Carey, Anita Colquhoun, Juliet Compston, Klaus Engelke, Paola A Erba, Nicholas C Harvey, Diane Krueger, Willem F Lems, E Michael Lewiecki, Sarah Morgan, Kendall F Moseley, Christopher O'Brien, Linda Probyn, Yumie Rhee, Bradford Richmond, John T Schousboe, Christopher Shuhart, Kate A Ward, Tim Van den Wyngaert, Jules Zhang-Yin, Aliya A Khan
{"title":"更新了双能 X 射线吸收测量(DXA)实践指南。","authors":"Riemer H J A Slart, Marija Punda, Dalal S Ali, Alberto Bazzocchi, Oliver Bock, Pauline Camacho, John J Carey, Anita Colquhoun, Juliet Compston, Klaus Engelke, Paola A Erba, Nicholas C Harvey, Diane Krueger, Willem F Lems, E Michael Lewiecki, Sarah Morgan, Kendall F Moseley, Christopher O'Brien, Linda Probyn, Yumie Rhee, Bradford Richmond, John T Schousboe, Christopher Shuhart, Kate A Ward, Tim Van den Wyngaert, Jules Zhang-Yin, Aliya A Khan","doi":"10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The introduction of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) technology in the 1980s revolutionized the diagnosis, management and monitoring of osteoporosis, providing a clinical tool which is now available worldwide. However, DXA measurements are influenced by many technical factors, including the quality control procedures for the instrument, positioning of the patient, and approach to analysis. Reporting of DXA results may be confounded by factors such as selection of reference ranges for T-scores and Z-scores, as well as inadequate knowledge of current standards for interpretation. These points are addressed at length in many international guidelines but are not always easily assimilated by practising clinicians and technicians. Our aim in this report is to identify key elements pertaining to the use of DXA in clinical practice, considering both technical and clinical aspects. Here, we discuss technical aspects of DXA procedures, approaches to interpretation and integration into clinical practice, and the use of non-bone mineral density measurements, such as a vertebral fracture assessment, in clinical risk assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":11909,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging","volume":" ","pages":"539-563"},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732917/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Updated practice guideline for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).\",\"authors\":\"Riemer H J A Slart, Marija Punda, Dalal S Ali, Alberto Bazzocchi, Oliver Bock, Pauline Camacho, John J Carey, Anita Colquhoun, Juliet Compston, Klaus Engelke, Paola A Erba, Nicholas C Harvey, Diane Krueger, Willem F Lems, E Michael Lewiecki, Sarah Morgan, Kendall F Moseley, Christopher O'Brien, Linda Probyn, Yumie Rhee, Bradford Richmond, John T Schousboe, Christopher Shuhart, Kate A Ward, Tim Van den Wyngaert, Jules Zhang-Yin, Aliya A Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The introduction of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) technology in the 1980s revolutionized the diagnosis, management and monitoring of osteoporosis, providing a clinical tool which is now available worldwide. However, DXA measurements are influenced by many technical factors, including the quality control procedures for the instrument, positioning of the patient, and approach to analysis. Reporting of DXA results may be confounded by factors such as selection of reference ranges for T-scores and Z-scores, as well as inadequate knowledge of current standards for interpretation. These points are addressed at length in many international guidelines but are not always easily assimilated by practising clinicians and technicians. Our aim in this report is to identify key elements pertaining to the use of DXA in clinical practice, considering both technical and clinical aspects. Here, we discuss technical aspects of DXA procedures, approaches to interpretation and integration into clinical practice, and the use of non-bone mineral density measurements, such as a vertebral fracture assessment, in clinical risk assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"539-563\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732917/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
20 世纪 80 年代引入的双能量 X 射线吸收测量(DXA)技术为骨质疏松症的诊断、管理和监测带来了革命性的变化,提供了一种目前在全球范围内使用的临床工具。然而,DXA 测量受到许多技术因素的影响,包括仪器的质量控制程序、患者的体位和分析方法。DXA 结果的报告可能会受到一些因素的干扰,如 T 值和 Z 值参考范围的选择,以及对当前判读标准的认识不足。这些问题在许多国际指南中都有详细论述,但临床医师和技术人员并不总能轻易掌握。本报告旨在从技术和临床两个方面,确定在临床实践中使用 DXA 的关键要素。在此,我们将讨论 DXA 程序的技术方面、解释和融入临床实践的方法,以及在临床风险评估中使用非骨矿物质密度测量方法(如椎体骨折评估)。
Updated practice guideline for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).
The introduction of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) technology in the 1980s revolutionized the diagnosis, management and monitoring of osteoporosis, providing a clinical tool which is now available worldwide. However, DXA measurements are influenced by many technical factors, including the quality control procedures for the instrument, positioning of the patient, and approach to analysis. Reporting of DXA results may be confounded by factors such as selection of reference ranges for T-scores and Z-scores, as well as inadequate knowledge of current standards for interpretation. These points are addressed at length in many international guidelines but are not always easily assimilated by practising clinicians and technicians. Our aim in this report is to identify key elements pertaining to the use of DXA in clinical practice, considering both technical and clinical aspects. Here, we discuss technical aspects of DXA procedures, approaches to interpretation and integration into clinical practice, and the use of non-bone mineral density measurements, such as a vertebral fracture assessment, in clinical risk assessment.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging serves as a platform for the exchange of clinical and scientific information within nuclear medicine and related professions. It welcomes international submissions from professionals involved in the functional, metabolic, and molecular investigation of diseases. The journal's coverage spans physics, dosimetry, radiation biology, radiochemistry, and pharmacy, providing high-quality peer review by experts in the field. Known for highly cited and downloaded articles, it ensures global visibility for research work and is part of the EJNMMI journal family.