Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae

Shane A. Norris, John M. Pettifor, Dave A. Gray, Anna Biscardi, Rochelle Buffenstein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The rabbit could be a superior animal model to use in bone physiology studies, for the rabbit does attain true skeletal maturity. However, there are neither normative bone mineral density (BMD) data on the rabbit nor are there any validation studies on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure spinal BMD in the rabbit. Therefore, our aim was twofold: first, to investigate whether DXA could be used precisely and accurately to determine the bone mineral content (BMC), bone area (BA), and BMD of the rabbit lumbar spine; Second, to evaluate the new generation fan-beam DXA (Hologic QDR-4500) with small animal software by comparing two DXA methodologies QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 with each other, as well as against volumetric bone density (VBMD) derived from Archimedes' principle as expected, there was a magnification error in the QDR-4500 (BMC, BA, and BMD increased by 52%, 38%, and 10%, respectively, when the vertebrae were positioned flat against the scanning table). With the magnification error kept constant (vertebrae positioned 10 cm above the scanning table to match the height in vivo), there were no differences among the mean BMC, BA, and BMD of the rabbit vertebrae (L1-L7) in vivo and in vitro using the QDR-4500 (p > 0.05). BMC, BA, and BMD differed between QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 in vitro because of a magnification error when the vertebrae were flat on the table (p < 0.0001), and, consequently, the machines did not correlate with one another (p > 0.05). However, the BMC, BA, and BMD of the two DXAs did significantly correlate with each other in vivo and in vitro when the magnification error was compensated for (r2 = 0.44 and 0.52, r2= 0.45 and 0.63, and r2= 0.41 and 0.60, respectively, p < 0.05-0.008). The BMC and BMD (in vivo and in vitro) of the rabbit vertebrae measured by QDR-4500 was significantly correlated with VMBD, ash weight, and mineral content (r2= 0.67-0.90, p < 0.01-0.0001). Therefore, the QDR-4500 can be used to yield precise and accurate measurements of the rabbit spine.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)49-55
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Clinical Densitometry
Volume3
Issue number1
StatePublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Photon Absorptiometry
Bone Density
Spine
Rabbits
Bone and Bones
Validation Studies
Minerals

Keywords

  • Bone mineral density
  • DXA
  • Rabbit

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Norris, S. A., Pettifor, J. M., Gray, D. A., Biscardi, A., & Buffenstein, R. (2000). Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae. Journal of Clinical Densitometry, 3(1), 49-55.

Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae. / Norris, Shane A.; Pettifor, John M.; Gray, Dave A.; Biscardi, Anna; Buffenstein, Rochelle.

In: Journal of Clinical Densitometry, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2000, p. 49-55.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Norris, SA, Pettifor, JM, Gray, DA, Biscardi, A & Buffenstein, R 2000, 'Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae', Journal of Clinical Densitometry, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 49-55.
Norris, Shane A. ; Pettifor, John M. ; Gray, Dave A. ; Biscardi, Anna ; Buffenstein, Rochelle. / Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae. In: Journal of Clinical Densitometry. 2000 ; Vol. 3, No. 1. pp. 49-55.
@article{26a9f6d6512f4cbebda548ba1bc53492,
title = "Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae",
abstract = "The rabbit could be a superior animal model to use in bone physiology studies, for the rabbit does attain true skeletal maturity. However, there are neither normative bone mineral density (BMD) data on the rabbit nor are there any validation studies on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure spinal BMD in the rabbit. Therefore, our aim was twofold: first, to investigate whether DXA could be used precisely and accurately to determine the bone mineral content (BMC), bone area (BA), and BMD of the rabbit lumbar spine; Second, to evaluate the new generation fan-beam DXA (Hologic QDR-4500) with small animal software by comparing two DXA methodologies QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 with each other, as well as against volumetric bone density (VBMD) derived from Archimedes' principle as expected, there was a magnification error in the QDR-4500 (BMC, BA, and BMD increased by 52{\%}, 38{\%}, and 10{\%}, respectively, when the vertebrae were positioned flat against the scanning table). With the magnification error kept constant (vertebrae positioned 10 cm above the scanning table to match the height in vivo), there were no differences among the mean BMC, BA, and BMD of the rabbit vertebrae (L1-L7) in vivo and in vitro using the QDR-4500 (p > 0.05). BMC, BA, and BMD differed between QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 in vitro because of a magnification error when the vertebrae were flat on the table (p < 0.0001), and, consequently, the machines did not correlate with one another (p > 0.05). However, the BMC, BA, and BMD of the two DXAs did significantly correlate with each other in vivo and in vitro when the magnification error was compensated for (r2 = 0.44 and 0.52, r2= 0.45 and 0.63, and r2= 0.41 and 0.60, respectively, p < 0.05-0.008). The BMC and BMD (in vivo and in vitro) of the rabbit vertebrae measured by QDR-4500 was significantly correlated with VMBD, ash weight, and mineral content (r2= 0.67-0.90, p < 0.01-0.0001). Therefore, the QDR-4500 can be used to yield precise and accurate measurements of the rabbit spine.",
keywords = "Bone mineral density, DXA, Rabbit",
author = "Norris, {Shane A.} and Pettifor, {John M.} and Gray, {Dave A.} and Anna Biscardi and Rochelle Buffenstein",
year = "2000",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "49--55",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Densitometry",
issn = "1094-6950",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation and application of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measure bone mineral density in rabbit vertebrae

AU - Norris, Shane A.

AU - Pettifor, John M.

AU - Gray, Dave A.

AU - Biscardi, Anna

AU - Buffenstein, Rochelle

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - The rabbit could be a superior animal model to use in bone physiology studies, for the rabbit does attain true skeletal maturity. However, there are neither normative bone mineral density (BMD) data on the rabbit nor are there any validation studies on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure spinal BMD in the rabbit. Therefore, our aim was twofold: first, to investigate whether DXA could be used precisely and accurately to determine the bone mineral content (BMC), bone area (BA), and BMD of the rabbit lumbar spine; Second, to evaluate the new generation fan-beam DXA (Hologic QDR-4500) with small animal software by comparing two DXA methodologies QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 with each other, as well as against volumetric bone density (VBMD) derived from Archimedes' principle as expected, there was a magnification error in the QDR-4500 (BMC, BA, and BMD increased by 52%, 38%, and 10%, respectively, when the vertebrae were positioned flat against the scanning table). With the magnification error kept constant (vertebrae positioned 10 cm above the scanning table to match the height in vivo), there were no differences among the mean BMC, BA, and BMD of the rabbit vertebrae (L1-L7) in vivo and in vitro using the QDR-4500 (p > 0.05). BMC, BA, and BMD differed between QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 in vitro because of a magnification error when the vertebrae were flat on the table (p < 0.0001), and, consequently, the machines did not correlate with one another (p > 0.05). However, the BMC, BA, and BMD of the two DXAs did significantly correlate with each other in vivo and in vitro when the magnification error was compensated for (r2 = 0.44 and 0.52, r2= 0.45 and 0.63, and r2= 0.41 and 0.60, respectively, p < 0.05-0.008). The BMC and BMD (in vivo and in vitro) of the rabbit vertebrae measured by QDR-4500 was significantly correlated with VMBD, ash weight, and mineral content (r2= 0.67-0.90, p < 0.01-0.0001). Therefore, the QDR-4500 can be used to yield precise and accurate measurements of the rabbit spine.

AB - The rabbit could be a superior animal model to use in bone physiology studies, for the rabbit does attain true skeletal maturity. However, there are neither normative bone mineral density (BMD) data on the rabbit nor are there any validation studies on the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure spinal BMD in the rabbit. Therefore, our aim was twofold: first, to investigate whether DXA could be used precisely and accurately to determine the bone mineral content (BMC), bone area (BA), and BMD of the rabbit lumbar spine; Second, to evaluate the new generation fan-beam DXA (Hologic QDR-4500) with small animal software by comparing two DXA methodologies QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 with each other, as well as against volumetric bone density (VBMD) derived from Archimedes' principle as expected, there was a magnification error in the QDR-4500 (BMC, BA, and BMD increased by 52%, 38%, and 10%, respectively, when the vertebrae were positioned flat against the scanning table). With the magnification error kept constant (vertebrae positioned 10 cm above the scanning table to match the height in vivo), there were no differences among the mean BMC, BA, and BMD of the rabbit vertebrae (L1-L7) in vivo and in vitro using the QDR-4500 (p > 0.05). BMC, BA, and BMD differed between QDR-1000 and QDR-4500 in vitro because of a magnification error when the vertebrae were flat on the table (p < 0.0001), and, consequently, the machines did not correlate with one another (p > 0.05). However, the BMC, BA, and BMD of the two DXAs did significantly correlate with each other in vivo and in vitro when the magnification error was compensated for (r2 = 0.44 and 0.52, r2= 0.45 and 0.63, and r2= 0.41 and 0.60, respectively, p < 0.05-0.008). The BMC and BMD (in vivo and in vitro) of the rabbit vertebrae measured by QDR-4500 was significantly correlated with VMBD, ash weight, and mineral content (r2= 0.67-0.90, p < 0.01-0.0001). Therefore, the QDR-4500 can be used to yield precise and accurate measurements of the rabbit spine.

KW - Bone mineral density

KW - DXA

KW - Rabbit

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034105940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034105940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10917741

AN - SCOPUS:0034105940

VL - 3

SP - 49

EP - 55

JO - Journal of Clinical Densitometry

JF - Journal of Clinical Densitometry

SN - 1094-6950

IS - 1

ER -