Total Hip Region of Interest Incorrect/Hologic

In this Hologic image, the lateral line is not 5 pixels from the greater trochanter.

In this analysis, the lateral aspect region of interest line is now 5 pixels from the greater trochanter

Case Description:

The total hip box is not 5 pixels lateral to the greater trochanter. The correction in the right panel did not affect the total hip results. The bottom of the Hologic total hip box is the most important related to total hip results. In Hologic, the upper, inner and outer edges are all set with a blue line that touches bone and the yellow line that is 5 out. The exception is the bottom line, which is 10 pixels below.

Credit:

Sarah L Morgan, MD, RD, CCD, The University of Alabama at Birmingham

References:

• Feit, A., et al., Effect of positioning of the region of interest on bone density of the hip. . J Clin Densitom, 2020: 23(3) p 426-431.
• Morgan, S.L. and F. Peace, Do changes in the femoral neck box size make a significant difference in femoral neck BMD? . J Clin Densitom, 2011. 14 p. 156
• McKiernan, F.E., et al., A long femur scan field does not alter proximal femur bone mineral density measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. J Clin Densitom, 2011. 14(3): p. 354-8.
• Prater, G.L., et al., The effect of extending femur scan length on BMD results on the Hologic Discovery-W scanner. J Clin Densitom, 2014. 17(4): p. 518-21.
• Celik, O., et al., The effect of hip rotation on bone mineral density of the proximal femur measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi, 2009. 20(2): p. 71-7.
• Cheng, X.G., et al., Effects of anteversion on femoral bone mineral density and geometry measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry: a cadaver study. Bone, 1997. 21(1): p. 113-7.
• Girard, M.S., et al., Measured femoral density by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry as a function of rotation. Orthop Rev, 1994. 23(1): p. 38-40.
• Goh, J.C., S.L. Low, and K. Bose, Effect of femoral rotation on bone mineral density measurements with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Calcif Tissue Int, 1995. 57(5): p. 340-3.
• Lekamwasam, S. and R.S. Lenora, Effect of leg rotation on hip bone mineral density measurements. J Clin Densitom, 2003. 6(4): p. 331-6.
• Rosenthall, L., Range of change of measured BMD in the femoral neck and total hip with rotation in women. J Bone Miner Metab, 2004. 22(5): p. 496-9.
• Tang, H., S.M. Ren, and X.Z. Luo, [Effect of femoral rotation on hip bone mineral density measurement]. Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao, 2003. 25(3): p. 267-70.
• Wilson, C.R., et al., The effect of positioning on dual energy X-ray bone densitometry of the proximal femur. Bone Miner, 1991. 13(1): p. 69-76.
• McKiernan, F. and W. Washington, Effect of subtle positioning flaws on measured bone mineral density of the hip. J Clin Densitom, 2005. 8(3): p. 330-4.
• Hans, D., et al., Effects of a new positioner on the precision of hip bone mineral density measurements. J Bone Miner Res, 1997. 12(8): p. 1289-94.