• Osteoporos Int · Jan 2016

    Effect of IV contrast on lumbar trabecular attenuation at routine abdominal CT: correlation with DXA and implications for opportunistic osteoporosis screening.

    • P J Pickhardt, T Lauder, B D Pooler, A Muñoz Del Rio, H Rosas, R J Bruce, and N Binkley.
    • Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, E3/311 Clinical Science Center, 600 Highland Ave., Madison, WI, 53792-3252, USA. ppickhardt2@uwhealth.org.
    • Osteoporos Int. 2016 Jan 1; 27 (1): 147-52.

    UnlabelledOsteoporosis remains under-diagnosed. Routine abdominal CT can provide opportunistic screening, but the effect of IV contrast is largely unknown. The overall performance for predicting osteoporosis was similar between enhanced and unenhanced scans. Therefore, both non-contrast and contrast-enhanced abdominal CT scans can be employed for opportunistic osteoporosis screening.IntroductionOsteoporosis is an important yet under-diagnosed public health concern. Lumbar attenuation measurement at routine abdominal CT can provide a simple opportunistic initial screen, but the effect of IV contrast has not been fully evaluated.MethodsMean trabecular CT attenuation values (in Hounsfield units, HU) at the L1 vertebral level were measured by oval region-of-interest (ROI) on both the unenhanced and IV-contrast-enhanced CT series in 157 adults (mean age, 62.0). All patients underwent correlative central DXA within 6 months of CT. Based on DXA BMD of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and total proximal femur: osteoporosis, osteopenia, and normal BMD was present in 33, 77, and 47, respectively. Statistical analysis included Bland-Altman plots and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.ResultsMean difference (±SD) in L1 trabecular attenuation between enhanced and unenhanced CT series was +11.2 HU (±19.2) (95 % CI, 8.16-14.22 HU), an 8 % difference. Intra-patient variation was substantial, but no overall trend in the HU difference was seen according to underlying BMD. ROC area under the curve (AUC) for unenhanced and enhanced CT for diagnosing osteoporosis were similar at 0.818 and 0.830, respectively (p = 0.632). Thresholds for maintaining 90 % specificity for osteoporosis were 90 HU for unenhanced and 102 HU for enhanced CT. Thresholds for maintaining 90 % sensitivity for osteoporosis were 139 HU for unenhanced and 144 HU for enhanced CT. Similar diagnostic performance was seen for diagnosing low BMD (osteoporosis or osteopenia) using higher HU cut-offs.ConclusionContrast-enhanced CT shows an average increase of 11 HU over the unenhanced series for L1 trabecular attenuation. The overall performance for predicting osteoporosis is similar between the enhanced and unenhanced scans, thus either can be employed for initial opportunistic screening.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…