Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 83-B, Issue 2 | Pages 283 - 288
1 Mar 2001
Wilkinson JM Peel NFA Elson RA Stockley I Eastell R

We aimed to evaluate the precision and longitudinal sensitivity of measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) in the pelvis and to determine the effect of bone cement on the measurement of BMD in femoral regions of interest (ROI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). A series of 29 patients had duplicate dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans of the hip within 13 months of THA. Pelvic analyses using 3- and 4-ROI models gave a coefficient of variation (CV) of 2.5% to 3.6% and of 2.5% to 4.8%, respectively. Repeat scans in 17 subjects one year later showed a significant change in BMD in three regions using the 4-ROI model, compared with change in only one region with the 3-ROI model (p < 0.05). Manual exclusion of cement from femoral ROIs increased the net CV from 1.6% to 3.6% (p = 0.001), and decreased the measured BMD by 20% (t = 12.1, p < 0.001). Studies of two cement phantoms in vitro showed a small downward drift in bone cement BMD giving a measurement error of less than 0.03 g/cm. 2. /year associated with inclusion of cement in femoral ROIs. Changes in pelvic periprosthetic BMD are best detected using a 4-ROI model. Analysis of femoral ROI is more precise without exclusion of cement although an awareness of its effect on the measurement of the BMD is needed


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 82-B, Issue 7 | Pages 1065 - 1071
1 Sep 2000
Martini F Lebherz C Mayer F Leichtle U Kremling E Sell S

Our aim was to determine the precision of the measurements of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in the proximal femur before and after implantation of an uncemented implant, with particular regard to the significance of retro- and prospective studies. We examined 60 patients to determine the difference in preoperative BMD between osteoarthritic and healthy hips. The results showed a preoperative BMD of the affected hip which was lower by a mean of 4% and by a maximum of 9% compared with the opposite side. In addition, measurements were made in the operated hip before and at ten days after operation to determine the effect of the implantation of an uncemented custom-made femoral stem. The mean increase in the BMD was 8% and the maximum was 24%. Previous retrospective studies have reported a marked loss of BMD on the operated side. The precision of double measurements using a special foot jig showed a modified coefficient of variation of 0.6% for the non-operated side in 15 patients and of 0.6% for the operated femur in 20 patients. The effect of rotation on the precision of the measurements after implantation of an uncemented femoral stem was determined in ten explanted femora and for the operated side in ten patients at 10° rotation and in 20 patients at 30° rotation. Rotation within 30° influenced the precision in studies in vivo and in vitro by a mean of 3% and in single cases in up to 60%. Precise prediction of the degree of loss of BMD is thus only possible in prospective cross-sectional measurements, since the effect of the difference in preoperative BMD, as well as the apparent increase in BMD after implantation of an uncemented stem, is not known from retrospective studies. The DEXA method is a reliable procedure for determining periprosthetic BMD when positioning and rotation are strictly controlled