CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Bone health and osteoporosis researchBody Composition Measurement TechniquesHIV-related health complications and treatments

DXA beyond bone mineral density and the REMS technique: New insights for current radiologists practice

Open access
Messina, Carmelo, Fusco, Stefano, Gazzotti, Silvia, Albano, Domenico, Bonaccorsi, Gloria, Guglielmi, Giuseppe, Bazzocchi, Alberto·2024·La radiologia medica
DOI 10.1007/s11547-024-01843-6PMC PMC11322484
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Osteoporosis is the most prevalent skeletal disorder, a condition that is associated with significant social and healthcare burden. In the elderly, osteoporosis is commonly associated with sarcopenia, further increasing the risk of fracture. Several imaging techniques are available for a non-invasive evaluation of osteoporosis and sarcopenia. This review focuses on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), as this technique offers the possibility to evaluate bone mineral density and body composition parameters with good precision and accuracy. DXA is also able to evaluate the amount of aortic calcification for cardiovascular risk estimation. Additionally, new DXA-based parameters have been developed in recent years to further refine fracture risk estimation, such as the Trabecular Bone Score and the Bone Strain Index. Finally, we describe the recent advances of a newly developed ultrasound-based technology known as Radiofrequency Echographic Multi-Spectrometry, which represent the latest non-ionizing approach for osteoporosis evaluation at central sites.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11547-024-01843-6

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 77

  1. [1]Kanis JA, Cooper C, Rizzoli R, Reginster JY (2019) European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 30:3–44. 10.1007/s00198-018-4704-5 30324412 10.1007/s00198-018-4704-5 PMC7026233 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [2]Miller PD, Siris ES, Barrett-Connor E et al (2002) Prediction of fracture risk in postmenopausal white women with peripheral bone densitometry: evidence from the national osteoporosis risk assessment. J Bone Miner Res 17:2222–2230. 10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2222 12469916 10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.12.2222 · DOI
  3. [3]Adams JE (2013) Advances in bone imaging for osteoporosis. Nat Rev Endocrinol 9:28–42. 10.1038/nrendo.2012.217 23232496 10.1038/nrendo.2012.217 · DOI
  4. [4]Hans D, Barthe N, Boutroy S et al (2011) Correlations between trabecular bone score, measured using anteroposterior dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry acquisition, and 3-dimensional parameters of bone microarchitecture: an experimental study on human cadaver vertebrae. J Clin Densitom 14:302–312. 10.1016/j.jocd.2011.05.005 21724435 10.1016/j.jocd.2011.05.005 · DOI
  5. [5]Silva BC, Broy SB, Boutroy S et al (2015) Fracture risk prediction by non-BMD DXA measures: the 2015 ISCD official positions part 2: trabecular bone score. J Clin Densitom 18:309–330. 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.06.008 26277849 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.06.008 · DOI
  6. [6]Bousson V, Bergot C, Sutter B et al (2012) Trabecular bone score (TBS): available knowledge, clinical relevance, and future prospects. Osteoporos Int 23:1489–1501. 10.1007/s00198-011-1824-6 22083541 10.1007/s00198-011-1824-6 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [7]McCloskey EV, Odén A, Harvey NC et al (2016) A meta-analysis of trabecular bone score in fracture risk prediction and its relationship to FRAX. J Bone Miner Res 31:940–948. 10.1002/jbmr.2734 26498132 10.1002/jbmr.2734 · DOI
  8. [8]Krohn K, Schwartz EN, Chung YS, Lewiecki EM (2019) Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry monitoring with trabecular bone score: 2019 ISCD official position. J Clin Densitom 22:501–505 31383412 10.1016/j.jocd.2019.07.006 · DOI
  9. [9]Bandirali M, Poloni A, Sconfienza LM et al (2015) Short-term precision assessment of trabecular bone score and bone mineral density using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry with different scan modes: an in vivo study. Eur Radiol. 10.1007/s00330-015-3606-6 25663312 10.1007/s00330-015-3606-6 · DOI
  10. [10]Shevroja E, Aubry-Rozier B, Hans G et al (2019) Clinical performance of the updated trabecular bone score (TBS) algorithm, which accounts for the soft tissue thickness: the Osteolaus study. J Bone Miner Res 34:2229–2237. 10.1002/jbmr.3851 31419331 10.1002/jbmr.3851 · DOI
  11. [11]Haeri NS, Perera S, Ferreiro I et al (2022) Trabecular bone score in the hip: a new method to examine hip bone microarchitecture-a feasibility study. Arch Osteoporos 17:126. 10.1007/s11657-022-01168-9 36125566 10.1007/s11657-022-01168-9 PMC12276939 · DOI
  12. [12]Ulivieri FM, Rinaudo L (2021) Beyond bone mineral density: a new dual X-ray absorptiometry index of bone strength to predict fragility fractures, the bone strain Index. Front Med (Lausanne) 7 PMC7843921 33521014
  13. [13]Ulivieri FM, Rinaudo L (2022) The bone strain index: an innovative dual X-ray absorptiometry bone strength index and its helpfulness in clinical medicine. J Clin Med 11 PMC9102586 35566410
  14. [14]Bazzocchi A, Isaac A, Dalili D et al (2022) Imaging of metabolic bone diseases: the spine view, part I. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 26:478–490. 10.1055/s-0042-1754340 36103889 10.1055/s-0042-1754340 · DOI
  15. [15]Colombo C, Libonati F, Rinaudo L et al (2019) A new finite element based parameter to predict bone fracture. PLoS ONE. 10.1371/journal.pone.0225905 31805121 10.1371/journal.pone.0225905 PMC6894848 · DOI
  16. [16]Han KS, Rohlmann A, Zander T, Taylor WR (2013) Lumbar spinal loads vary with body height and weight. Med Eng Phys 35:969–977. 10.1016/j.medengphy.2012.09.009 23040051 10.1016/j.medengphy.2012.09.009 · DOI
  17. [17]Terzini M, Aldieri A, Rinaudo L et al (2019) Improving the hip fracture risk prediction through 2D finite element models from DXA images: validation against 3D models. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 7:220. 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00220 31552243 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00220 PMC6746936 · DOI
  18. [18]Ulivieri FM, Rinaudo L, Messina C et al (2022) Bone Strain Index: preliminary distributional characteristics in a population of women with normal bone mass, osteopenia and osteoporosis. Radiol Med 127:1151–1158. 10.1007/s11547-022-01543-z 36057931 10.1007/s11547-022-01543-z · DOI
  19. [19]Sornay-Rendu E, Duboeuf F, Ulivieri FM et al (2022) The bone strain index predicts fragility fractures. The OFELY study. Bone. 10.1016/j.bone.2022.116348 35121211 10.1016/j.bone.2022.116348 · DOI
  20. [20]Ulivieri FM, Piodi LP, Rinaudo L et al (2020) Bone strain index in the prediction of vertebral fragility refracture. Eur Radiol Exp 4:23. 10.1186/s41747-020-00151-8 32274595 10.1186/s41747-020-00151-8 PMC7145882 · DOI
  21. [21]Messina C, Rinaudo L, Cesana BM et al (2021) Prediction of osteoporotic fragility re-fracture with lumbar spine DXA-based derived bone strain index: a multicenter validation study. Osteoporos Int 32:85–91. 10.1007/s00198-020-05620-9 32936366 10.1007/s00198-020-05620-9 · DOI
  22. [22]Tabacco G, Naciu AM, Messina C et al (2021) DXA-based bone strain index: a new tool to evaluate bone quality in primary hyperparathyroidism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 106:2304–2312. 10.1210/clinem/dgab317 33963754 10.1210/clinem/dgab317 PMC8599893 · DOI
  23. [23]Tabacco G, Naciu AM, Messina C et al (2023) DXA-based bone strain index in normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism. Osteoporos Int 34:999–1003. 10.1007/s00198-023-06669-y 36640186 10.1007/s00198-023-06669-y · DOI
  24. [24]Rodari G, Scuvera G, Ulivieri FM et al (2018) Progressive bone impairment with age and pubertal development in neurofibromatosis type I. Arch Osteoporos 13:93. 10.1007/s11657-018-0507-8 30151698 10.1007/s11657-018-0507-8 · DOI
  25. [25]Messina C, Piodi LP, Grossi E et al (2020) Artificial neural network analysis of bone quality DXA parameters response to teriparatide in fractured osteoporotic patients. PLoS ONE 15:e0229820. 10.1371/journal.pone.0229820 32160208 10.1371/journal.pone.0229820 PMC7065795 · DOI
  26. [26]Casciaro S, Peccarisi M, Pisani P et al (2016) An advanced quantitative echosound methodology for femoral neck densitometry. Ultrasound Med Biol 42:1337–1356. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.01.024 27033331 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.01.024 · DOI
  27. [27]Conversano F, Franchini R, Greco A et al (2015) A novel ultrasound methodology for estimating spine mineral density. Ultrasound Med Biol 41:281–300. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.08.017 25438845 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.08.017 · DOI
  28. [28]Diez-Perez A, Brandi ML, Al-Daghri N et al (2019) Radiofrequency echographic multi-spectrometry for the in-vivo assessment of bone strength: state of the art—outcomes of an expert consensus meeting organized by the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Mus. Aging Clin Exp Res 31:1375–1389 31422565 10.1007/s40520-019-01294-4 PMC6763416 · DOI
  29. [29]Pisani P, Greco A, Conversano F et al (2017) A quantitative ultrasound approach to estimate bone fragility: a first comparison with dual X-ray absorptiometry. Measurement (Lond) 101:243–249. 10.1016/j.measurement.2016.07.033 10.1016/j.measurement.2016.07.033 · DOI
  30. [30]Di Paola M, Gatti D, Viapiana O et al (2019) Radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry compared with dual X-ray absorptiometry for osteoporosis diagnosis on lumbar spine and femoral neck. Osteoporos Int 30:391–402. 10.1007/s00198-018-4686-3 30178159 10.1007/s00198-018-4686-3 · DOI
  31. [31]Messina C, Gitto S, Colombo R et al (2023) Short-term precision and repeatability of radiofrequency echographic multi spectrometry (REMS) on lumbar spine and proximal femur: an in vivo study. J Imaging. 10.3390/JIMAGING9060118 37367466 10.3390/JIMAGING9060118 PMC10300972 · DOI
  32. [32]Messina C, Buonomenna C, Menon G et al (2019) Fat mass does not increase the precision error of trabecular bone score measurements. J Clin Densitom 22:359–366. 10.1016/j.jocd.2019.01.001 30661747 10.1016/j.jocd.2019.01.001 · DOI
  33. [33]Messina C, Acquasanta M, Rinaudo L et al (2021) Short-term precision error of bone strain index, a new DXA-based finite element analysis software for assessing hip strength. J Clin Densitom 24:330–337. 10.1016/j.jocd.2020.10.013 33199190 10.1016/j.jocd.2020.10.013 · DOI
  34. [34]Cortet B, Dennison E, Diez-Perez A et al (2021) Radiofrequency echographic multi spectrometry (REMS) for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in a European multicenter clinical context. Bone 143:115786. 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115786 33278653 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115786 · DOI
  35. [35]Caffarelli C, Tomai Pitinca MD, Al Refaie A et al (2022) Could radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) overcome the overestimation in BMD by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at the lumbar spine? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 10.1186/s12891-022-05430-6 35590362 10.1186/s12891-022-05430-6 PMC9118880 · DOI
  36. [36]Caffarelli C, Al Refaie A, De Vita M et al (2022) Radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS): an innovative technique for the assessment of bone status in young women with anorexia nervosa. Eat Weight Disord 27:3207–3213. 10.1007/s40519-022-01450-2 35896857 10.1007/s40519-022-01450-2 PMC9803747 · DOI
  37. [37]Caffarelli C, Tomai Pitinca MD, Al Refaie A et al (2022) Ability of radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry to identify osteoporosis status in elderly women with type 2 diabetes. Aging Clin Exp Res 34:121–127. 10.1007/s40520-021-01889-w 34050917 10.1007/s40520-021-01889-w PMC8795029 · DOI
  38. [38]Valentina Anna D, Maria Luisa B, Greta C et al (2021) First assessment of bone mineral density in healthy pregnant women by means of Radiofrequency echographic multi spectrometry (REMS) technology. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 263:44–49. 10.1016/J.EJOGRB.2021.06.014 34167032 10.1016/J.EJOGRB.2021.06.014 · DOI
  39. [39]Lalli P, Mautino C, Busso C et al (2022) Reproducibility and accuracy of the radiofrequency echographic multi-spectrometry for femoral mineral density estimation and discriminative power of the femoral fragility score in patients with primary and disuse-related osteoporosis. J Clin Med. 10.3390/jcm11133761 35807046 10.3390/jcm11133761 PMC9267756 · DOI
  40. [40]Amorim DMR, Sakane EN, Maeda SS, Sergio Setsuo C (2021) New technology REMS for bone evaluation compared to DXA in adult women for the osteoporosis diagnosis: a real-life experience. Arch Osteoporos 16:175. 10.1007/s11657-021-00990-x 34786596 10.1007/s11657-021-00990-x · DOI
  41. [42]Campa F, Toselli S, Mazzilli M et al (2021) Assessment of body composition in athletes: a narrative review of available methods with special reference to quantitative and qualitative bioimpedance analysis. Nutrients 13:1620. 10.3390/nu13051620 34065984 10.3390/nu13051620 PMC8150618 · DOI · Paper page
  42. [43]Sam S (2018) Differential effect of subcutaneous abdominal and visceral adipose tissue on cardiometabolic risk. Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig. 10.1515/hmbci-2018-0014 29522417 10.1515/hmbci-2018-0014 · DOI
  43. [44]Beaudart C, Zaaria M, Pasleau F et al (2017) Health Outcomes of Sarcopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE 12:e0169548. 10.1371/journal.pone.0169548 28095426 10.1371/journal.pone.0169548 PMC5240970 · DOI
  44. [45]Albano D, Messina C, Vitale J, Sconfienza LM (2020) Imaging of sarcopenia: old evidence and new insights. Eur Radiol. 10.1007/s00330-019-06573-2 31834509 10.1007/s00330-019-06573-2 · DOI
  45. [46]Guglielmi G, Ponti F, Agostini M et al (2016) The role of DXA in sarcopenia. Aging Clin Exp Res 28:1047–1060. 10.1007/s40520-016-0589-3 27256078 10.1007/s40520-016-0589-3 · DOI
  46. [47]Bazzocchi A, Ponti F, Albisinni U et al (2016) DXA: technical aspects and application. Eur J Radiol 85:1481–1492. 10.1016/J.EJRAD.2016.04.004 27157852 10.1016/J.EJRAD.2016.04.004 · DOI · Paper page
  47. [48]Guglielmi G, Bazzocchi A (2020) Body composition imaging. Quant Imaging Med Surg 10:1576–1579. 10.21037/qims-2019-bc-13 32742952 10.21037/qims-2019-bc-13 PMC7378092 · DOI
  48. [49]Messina C, Albano D, Gitto S et al (2020) Body composition with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: from basics to new tools. Quant Imaging Med Surg 10:1687–1698 32742961 10.21037/qims.2020.03.02 PMC7378094 · DOI
  49. [50]Damilakis J, Adams JE, Guglielmi G, Link TM (2010) Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis. Eur Radiol 20:2707–2714. 10.1007/s00330-010-1845-0 20559834 10.1007/s00330-010-1845-0 PMC2948153 · DOI
  50. [51]Nana A, Slater GJ, Stewart AD, Burke LM (2015) Methodology review: using dual-energy X-Ray absorptiometry (DXA) for the assessment of body composition in athletes and active people. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 25:198–215. 10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0228 25029265 10.1123/ijsnem.2013-0228 · DOI · Paper page
  51. [52]Kaul S, Rothney MP, Peters DM et al (2012) Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for quantification of visceral fat. Obesity (Silver Spring) 20:1313–1318. 10.1038/OBY.2011.393 22282048 10.1038/OBY.2011.393 PMC3361068 · DOI · Paper page
  52. [53]Liu P, Ma F, Lou H, Liu Y (2013) The utility of fat mass index vs body mass index and percentage of body fat in the screening of metabolic syndrome. BMC Public Health. 10.1186/1471-2458-13-629 23819808 10.1186/1471-2458-13-629 PMC3703297 · DOI
  53. [54]Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J et al (2019) Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing 48:16–31. 10.1093/ageing/afy169 30312372 10.1093/ageing/afy169 PMC6322506 · DOI · Paper page
  54. [56]Borga M, West J, Bell JD et al (2018) Advanced body composition assessment: from body mass index to body composition profiling. J Investig Med 66:1–9. 10.1136/jim-2018-000722 29581385 10.1136/jim-2018-000722 PMC5992366 · DOI
  55. [57]Zhao X, Wang Z, Zhang J et al (2013) Estimation of total body skeletal muscle mass in chinese adults: prediction model by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. PLoS ONE 8:e53561. 10.1371/journal.pone.0053561 23308254 10.1371/journal.pone.0053561 PMC3538629 · DOI · Paper page
  56. [58]Kirk B, Zanker J, Duque G (2020) Osteosarcopenia: epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment-facts and numbers. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 11:609–618. 10.1002/JCSM.12567 32202056 10.1002/JCSM.12567 PMC7296259 · DOI
  57. [59]Paulin TK, Malmgren L, McGuigan FE, Akesson KE (2024) Osteosarcopenia: prevalence and 10-year fracture and mortality risk—a longitudinal, population-based study of 75-year-old women. Calcif Tissue Int 114:315–325. 10.1007/S00223-023-01181-1 38300303 10.1007/S00223-023-01181-1 PMC10957698 · DOI
  58. [60]Baim S, Binkley N, Bilezikian JP et al (2008) Official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry and executive summary of the 2007 ISCD position development conference. J Clin Densitom 11:75–91. 10.1016/j.jocd.2007.12.007 18442754 10.1016/j.jocd.2007.12.007 · DOI
  59. [61]Chuang ML, Massaro JM, Levitzky YS et al (2012) Prevalence and distribution of abdominal aortic calcium by gender and age group in a community-based cohort (from the Framingham Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 110:891–896. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.05.020 22727181 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.05.020 PMC3432173 · DOI
  60. [62]Yang S-W, Yang H-F, Chen Y-Y, Chen W-L (2021) Unraveling the link between metabolic syndrome and abdominal aortic calcification. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 31:464–471. 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.10.003 33223398 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.10.003 · DOI
  61. [63]Criqui MH, Denenberg JO, McClelland RL et al (2014) Abdominal aortic calcium, coronary artery calcium, and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 34:1574–1579. 10.1161/ATVBAHA.114.303268 24812323 10.1161/ATVBAHA.114.303268 PMC4153597 · DOI
  62. [64]Sethi A, Taylor DL, Ruby JG et al (2022) Calcification of the abdominal aorta is an under-appreciated cardiovascular disease risk factor in the general population. Front Cardiovasc Med 9:1003246. 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1003246 36277789 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1003246 PMC9582957 · DOI
  63. [65]Levitzky YS, Cupples LA, Murabito JM et al (2008) Prediction of intermittent claudication, ischemic stroke, and other cardiovascular disease by detection of abdominal aortic calcific deposits by plain lumbar radiographs. Am J Cardiol 101:326–331. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.08.032 18237594 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.08.032 · DOI
  64. [66]Leow K, Szulc P, Schousboe JT et al (2021) Prognostic value of abdominal aortic calcification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Am Heart Assoc 10:e017205–e017205. 10.1161/JAHA.120.017205 33439672 10.1161/JAHA.120.017205 PMC7955302 · DOI
  65. [67]Majjad A, Ghassem MA, Toufik H et al (2020) Relationship between vertebral fracture prevalence and abdominal aortic calcification in women with rheumatoid arthritis. Bone 141:115599. 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115599 32822872 10.1016/j.bone.2020.115599 · DOI
  66. [68]Wu M, Liu Y, Zhong C et al (2021) Osteoporosis was associated with severe abdominal aortic calcification based on a cross-sectional study. Arch Osteoporos. 10.1007/s11657-021-00927-4 34013479 10.1007/s11657-021-00927-4 · DOI
  67. [69]Gebre AK, Lewis JR, Leow K et al (2022) Abdominal aortic calcification, bone mineral density, and fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Gerontol Ser A. 10.1093/gerona/glac171 10.1093/gerona/glac171 36000920 · DOI
  68. [70]Setiawati R, Di CF, Rahardjo P et al (2016) Quantitative assessment of abdominal aortic calcifications using lateral lumbar radiograph, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and quantitative computed tomography of the spine. J Clin Densitom 19:242–249. 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.01.007 25708122 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.01.007 · DOI
  69. [71]Schousboe JT, Lewis JR, Kiel DP (2017) Abdominal aortic calcification on dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: Methods of assessment and clinical significance. Bone 104:91–100. 10.1016/j.bone.2017.01.025 28119178 10.1016/j.bone.2017.01.025 · DOI
  70. [72]Glüer C-C (2017) 30 years of DXA technology innovations. Bone 104:7–12. 10.1016/j.bone.2017.05.020 28552661 10.1016/j.bone.2017.05.020 · DOI
  71. [73]Kauppila LI, Polak JF, Cupples LA et al (1997) New indices to classify location, severity and progression of calcific lesions in the abdominal aorta: a 25-year follow-up study. Atherosclerosis 132:245–250. 10.1016/s0021-9150(97)00106-8 9242971 10.1016/s0021-9150(97)00106-8 · DOI
  72. [74]Schousboe JT, Wilson KE, Kiel DP (2006) Detection of abdominal aortic calcification with lateral spine imaging using DXA. J Clin Densitom 9:302–308. 10.1016/j.jocd.2006.05.007 16931348 10.1016/j.jocd.2006.05.007 · DOI
  73. [75]Schousboe JT, Wilson KE, Hangartner TN (2007) Detection of aortic calcification during vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) compared to digital radiography. PLoS ONE 2:e715–e715. 10.1371/journal.pone.0000715 17684561 10.1371/journal.pone.0000715 PMC1933602 · DOI
  74. [76]Wilson PWF, Kauppila LI, O’Donnell CJ et al (2001) Abdominal aortic calcific deposits are an important predictor of vascular morbidity and mortality. Circulation 103:1529–1534. 10.1161/01.cir.103.11.1529 11257080 10.1161/01.cir.103.11.1529 · DOI
  75. [77]Bazzocchi A, Ciccarese F, Diano D et al (2012) Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the evaluation of abdominal aortic calcifications. J Clin Densitom 15:198–204. 10.1016/j.jocd.2011.11.002 22321658 10.1016/j.jocd.2011.11.002 · DOI
  76. [78]Cecelja M, Frost ML, Spector TD, Chowienczyk P (2013) Abdominal aortic calcification detection using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: validation study in healthy women compared to computed tomography. Calcif Tissue Int 92:495–500. 10.1007/s00223-013-9704-z 23407824 10.1007/s00223-013-9704-z · DOI
  77. [79]Kelly TL, Wilson KE, Heymsfield SB (2009) Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry body composition reference values from NHANES. PLoS ONE 4:e7038. 10.1371/journal.pone.0007038 19753111 10.1371/journal.pone.0007038 PMC2737140 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Messina, C., Fusco, S., Gazzotti, S., Albano, D., Bonaccorsi, G., Guglielmi, G., & Bazzocchi, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli (IT)
  • University of Ferrara (IT)
  • University of Foggia (IT)
Corresponding author
Guglielmi, Giuseppe
ORCID
Venue
La radiologia medica
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-07-30
Volume
129
Issue
8
Pages
1224-1240
ISSN
  • 0033-8362 (ISSN-L)
  • 1826-6983
DOI
10.1007/s11547-024-01843-6
PMC
PMC11322484
OpenAlex
W4401109501
Cited by
31
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 2
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • La radiologia medica (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Università di Foggia
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › HIV-related health complications and treatments
Keywords
dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, osteoporosis, sarcopenia, bone mineral density, body composition, aortic calcification, cardiovascular risk, fracture risk prediction, trabecular bone score, radiofrequency echographic multi-spectrometry, non-ionizing imaging
MeSH terms
Body Composition, Humans, Osteoporosis, Ultrasonography, Absorptiometry, Photon, Bone Density, Risk Assessment, Sarcopenia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review