1991
DOI: 10.1259/0007-1285-64-760-298
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative computed tomography for bone mineral measurement: technical aspects, dosimetry, normal data and clinical applications

Abstract: A single KVp quantitative CT (QCT) technique was used for measuring the spinal trabecular bone density. The trabecular bone equivalent density (TBED) was expressed as the density of a K2HPO4 solution that exhibits a linear attenuation coefficient identical to that of trabecular bone. A field non-uniformity correcting factor was obtained from experiments on phantoms. The effective equivalent dose of the whole examination (four sections and a scout view) is 370 muSv. The in vivo short-term precision (reproducibi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
7
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2004
2004

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
6
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The error in precision has been estimated at 2% for bone mineral density in the proximal femur, 4% and 5% in the distal femur and proximal tibia and 3% for muscle volume in the mid-femur. These estimates were made in our department with the same equipment (Neander et al 1997a), and are similar to those reported elsewhere (Steiger et al 1990, Karantanas et al 1991.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The error in precision has been estimated at 2% for bone mineral density in the proximal femur, 4% and 5% in the distal femur and proximal tibia and 3% for muscle volume in the mid-femur. These estimates were made in our department with the same equipment (Neander et al 1997a), and are similar to those reported elsewhere (Steiger et al 1990, Karantanas et al 1991.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The precision error has earlier been estimated at 2% for bone mineral density in the middle femur, 4% and 5% of the distal femur and the proximal tibia, respectively, and 3% for muscle volume of the the middle femur in our department with the same equipment (Neander et al 1997). These values are similar to those that others have found (Steiger et al 1990, Karantanas et al 1991.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The precision error has earlier been estimated as 2% for bone mineral density in the middle femur, 4% and 5% for the distal femur and the proximal tibia, respectively, and 3% for muscle volume of the middle femur (Neander et al 1997). These values are similar to those found by others (Karantanas et al 1991).…”
Section: Measurementssupporting
confidence: 93%