Abstract
Osteoporosis is underdiagnosed and undertreated. To improve timely fracture risk assessment optimized densitometry methods are required such as opportunistic spinal quantitative computed tomography (QCT). However, it is unclear how to best calibrate these scans and correct for potential scanner drift of QCT when used for monitoring bone mineral density (BMD) changes. We compared gold standard simultaneous calibration with asynchronous calibration methods, assessing mid-term (12 weeks) and long-term (1.5 years) reproducibility of BMD measurements. Cortical and trabecular compartments of the European Spine Phantom were studied with ten different protocols including low dose and high resolution (HR)-modes. Based on weekly phantom data, we compared simultaneous calibration to asynchronous single (termed global) or monthly calibration. The accuracy was better for trabecular measurements than for cortical measurements for all calibration methods. Reproducibility was excellent for all methods and slightly better for asynchronous than for simultaneous calibration both for trabecular and cortical bone. For HR protocols, reproducibility was better than for low dose measurements. In trabecular compartments averaged HR-BMD remained stable for global (- 0.1%/year, ns) but not for simultaneous calibration (- 1.5%/year, p < 0.001). No significant drifts could be detected for averaged low dose BMD (- 0.9 to + 0.8%/year) for either calibration method. Our data suggest that with regard to precision and accuracy measurements with asynchronous calibration are suitable for vertebral BMD assessment (no contrast agents) in clinical practice. Regular (e.g., monthly) stability tests using a calibration phantom could assure long term stability of at least 1 year.