Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Archives of Osteoporosis 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Osteoporosis | Original Article

Comparative analysis of bone outcomes between quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry from the UK Biobank cohort

Authors: Paul A Swinton, Kirsty J Elliott-Sale, Craig Sale

Published in: Archives of Osteoporosis | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Summary

This large cohort study investigated reliability and validity of heel ultrasound to estimate bone mineral density in adults. Reliability calculated between left and right heels was relatively poor and so was criterion validity assessed relative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Heel ultrasound should be used cautiously when estimating bone mineral density.

Introduction

Calcaneal quantitative ultrasound (QUS) may be used as a safe, low cost, and portable means to estimate bone mineral density (BMD) in large cohorts. The purpose of this study was to quantify the reliability and validity of QUS in comparison to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which is the reference method for BMD measurement and diagnoses of osteopenia and osteoporosis.

Methods

Bone outcomes measured on the large UK Biobank cohort were used. The reliability of QUS estimated BMD was quantified by comparing values obtained from the left and right heel measured in the same session. Criterion validity was assessed through agreement between QUS and DXA, quantifying correlations, and sensitivity and specificity of osteopenia and osteoporosis diagnoses.

Results

Reliability calculations were made using data from over 216,000 participants demonstrating similar QUS BMD values between left and right heels in the absolute scale (Sd of difference for men: 0.12 and 0.07 g·cm−2). However, when expressed in relative scales, including concordance of quartiles, reliability was poor. Agreement between QUS and DXA was quantified using data from 5042 participants. Low to modest correlations (r = 0.29 to 0.44) were obtained between multiple QUS variables and DXA BMD, with sensitivity identified as very poor (0.05 to 0.23) for osteoporosis, and poor (0.37 to 0.62) for osteopenia diagnoses.

Conclusions

The findings of this large comparative analysis identify that whilst calcaneal QUS has the potential to produce reliable absolute BMD measurements and demonstrate modest associations with DXA BMD measures, use of that information to make relative statements about participants in the context of the larger population or to appropriately diagnose osteopenia or osteoporosis may be severely limited.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Hernlund E, Svedbom A, Ivergård M, Compston J, Cooper C, Stenmark J, McCloskey EV, Jönsson B, Kanis JA (2013) Osteoporosis in the European Union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden. A report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 8(1):136CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hernlund E, Svedbom A, Ivergård M, Compston J, Cooper C, Stenmark J, McCloskey EV, Jönsson B, Kanis JA (2013) Osteoporosis in the European Union: medical management, epidemiology and economic burden. A report prepared in collaboration with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry Associations (EFPIA). Arch Osteoporos 8(1):136CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference International Osteoporosis Foundation (2018) Broken Bones, Broken Lives: a roadmap to solve the fragility fracture crisis in the United Kingdom. IOF Report International Osteoporosis Foundation (2018) Broken Bones, Broken Lives: a roadmap to solve the fragility fracture crisis in the United Kingdom. IOF Report
3.
go back to reference Clynes MA, Harvey NC, Curtis EM, Fuggle NR, Dennison EM, Cooper C (2020) The epidemiology of osteoporosis. Br Med Bull 133(1):105–117PubMed Clynes MA, Harvey NC, Curtis EM, Fuggle NR, Dennison EM, Cooper C (2020) The epidemiology of osteoporosis. Br Med Bull 133(1):105–117PubMed
4.
go back to reference World Health Organisation (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. World Health Organization, (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 843), Geneva World Health Organisation (1994) Assessment of fracture risk and its application to screening for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Report of a WHO Study Group. World Health Organization, (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 843), Geneva
5.
go back to reference Damilakis J, Adams JE, Guglielmi G, Link TM (2010) Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis. Eur Radiol 20(11):2707–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Damilakis J, Adams JE, Guglielmi G, Link TM (2010) Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis. Eur Radiol 20(11):2707–2714CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Khangura SD, Mahood Q (2022) CADTH health technology review portable bone imaging devices for screening and diagnosing osteoporosis. Can J Med Technol 8(2):1–41 Khangura SD, Mahood Q (2022) CADTH health technology review portable bone imaging devices for screening and diagnosing osteoporosis. Can J Med Technol 8(2):1–41
7.
go back to reference Baroncelli GI (2008) Quantitative ultrasound methods to assess bone mineral status in children: technical characteristics, performance and clinical application. Pediatr Res 63(3):220–228CrossRefPubMed Baroncelli GI (2008) Quantitative ultrasound methods to assess bone mineral status in children: technical characteristics, performance and clinical application. Pediatr Res 63(3):220–228CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Morita R, Yamamoto I, Yuu I, Hamanaka Y, Ohta T, Takada M, Matsushita R, Masuda K (1997) Quantitative ultrasound for the assessment of bone status. Osteoporos Int 7(Suppl 3):S128–S134CrossRefPubMed Morita R, Yamamoto I, Yuu I, Hamanaka Y, Ohta T, Takada M, Matsushita R, Masuda K (1997) Quantitative ultrasound for the assessment of bone status. Osteoporos Int 7(Suppl 3):S128–S134CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Genant HK, Engelke K, Fuerst T, Glüer CC, Grampp S, Harris ST, Jergas M, Lang T, Lu Y, Majumdar S, Mathur A, Takada M (1996) Noninvasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: state of the art. J Bone Miner Res 11(6):707–730CrossRefPubMed Genant HK, Engelke K, Fuerst T, Glüer CC, Grampp S, Harris ST, Jergas M, Lang T, Lu Y, Majumdar S, Mathur A, Takada M (1996) Noninvasive assessment of bone mineral and structure: state of the art. J Bone Miner Res 11(6):707–730CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Njeh CF, Boivin CM, Langton CM (1997) The role of ultrasound in the assessment of osteoporosis: a review. Osteoporos Int 7(1):7–22CrossRefPubMed Njeh CF, Boivin CM, Langton CM (1997) The role of ultrasound in the assessment of osteoporosis: a review. Osteoporos Int 7(1):7–22CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Fu Y, Li C, Luo W, Chen Z, Liu Z, Ding Y (2021) Fragility fracture discriminative ability of radius quantitative ultrasound: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 32(1):23–38CrossRefPubMed Fu Y, Li C, Luo W, Chen Z, Liu Z, Ding Y (2021) Fragility fracture discriminative ability of radius quantitative ultrasound: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 32(1):23–38CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Marín F, González-Macías J, Díez-Pérez A, Palma S, Delgado-Rodríguez M (2006) Relationship between bone quantitative ultrasound and fractures: a meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Res 21(7):1126–1135CrossRefPubMed Marín F, González-Macías J, Díez-Pérez A, Palma S, Delgado-Rodríguez M (2006) Relationship between bone quantitative ultrasound and fractures: a meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Res 21(7):1126–1135CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Pennington Z, Ehresman J, Lubelski D, Cottrill E, Schilling A, Ahmed AK, Feghali J, Witham TF, Sciubba DM (2021) Assessing underlying bone quality in spine surgery patients: a narrative review of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and alternatives. Spine J 21(2):321–331CrossRefPubMed Pennington Z, Ehresman J, Lubelski D, Cottrill E, Schilling A, Ahmed AK, Feghali J, Witham TF, Sciubba DM (2021) Assessing underlying bone quality in spine surgery patients: a narrative review of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and alternatives. Spine J 21(2):321–331CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Nguyen HG, Lieu KB, Ho-Le TP, Ho-Pham LT, Nguyen TV (2021) Discordance between quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in bone mineral density: The Vietnam Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Sarcopenia 7(1):6–10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nguyen HG, Lieu KB, Ho-Le TP, Ho-Pham LT, Nguyen TV (2021) Discordance between quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in bone mineral density: The Vietnam Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporos Sarcopenia 7(1):6–10CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Weeks BK, Hirsch R, Nogueira RC, Beck BR (2016) Is calcaneal broadband ultrasound attenuation a valid index of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived bone mass in children? Bone Joint Res 5(11):538–543CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Weeks BK, Hirsch R, Nogueira RC, Beck BR (2016) Is calcaneal broadband ultrasound attenuation a valid index of dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry-derived bone mass in children? Bone Joint Res 5(11):538–543CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Tabor E, Pluskiewicz W, Tabor K (2018) Clinical Conformity between heel ultrasound and densitometry in postmenopausal women: a systematic review. J Ultrasound Med 37(2):363–369CrossRefPubMed Tabor E, Pluskiewicz W, Tabor K (2018) Clinical Conformity between heel ultrasound and densitometry in postmenopausal women: a systematic review. J Ultrasound Med 37(2):363–369CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Steiner B, Dimai HP, Steiner H, Cirar S, Fahrleitner-Pammer A (2019) Prescreening for osteoporosis with quantitative ultrasound in postmenopausal white women. J Med Ultrasound 38(6):1553–1559CrossRef Steiner B, Dimai HP, Steiner H, Cirar S, Fahrleitner-Pammer A (2019) Prescreening for osteoporosis with quantitative ultrasound in postmenopausal white women. J Med Ultrasound 38(6):1553–1559CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Arlot ME, Sornay-Rendu E, Garnero P, Vey-Marty B, Delmas PD (1997) Apparent pre- and postmenopausal bone loss evaluated by DXA at different skeletal sites in women: the OFELY cohort. J Bone Miner Res 12(4):683–690CrossRefPubMed Arlot ME, Sornay-Rendu E, Garnero P, Vey-Marty B, Delmas PD (1997) Apparent pre- and postmenopausal bone loss evaluated by DXA at different skeletal sites in women: the OFELY cohort. J Bone Miner Res 12(4):683–690CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Gelman A (2008) Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Stat Med 27(10):2865–2873CrossRefPubMed Gelman A (2008) Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations. Stat Med 27(10):2865–2873CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Trevethan R (2017) Sensitivity, Specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health 5:307CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Trevethan R (2017) Sensitivity, Specificity, and predictive values: foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. Front Public Health 5:307CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Rigby RA, Stasinopoulos DM (2005) Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape (with discussion). Appl Stat 54:507–554 Rigby RA, Stasinopoulos DM (2005) Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape (with discussion). Appl Stat 54:507–554
26.
go back to reference Fan B, Lu Y, Genant H, Fuerst T, Shepherd J (2010) Does standardized BMD still remove differences between hologic and GE-lunar state-of-the-art DXA systems? Osteoporos Int 21:1227–1236CrossRefPubMed Fan B, Lu Y, Genant H, Fuerst T, Shepherd J (2010) Does standardized BMD still remove differences between hologic and GE-lunar state-of-the-art DXA systems? Osteoporos Int 21:1227–1236CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Moayyeri A, Adams JE, Adler RA, Krieg MA, Hans D, Compston J, Lewiecki EM (2012) Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 23:143–153CrossRefPubMed Moayyeri A, Adams JE, Adler RA, Krieg MA, Hans D, Compston J, Lewiecki EM (2012) Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 23:143–153CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparative analysis of bone outcomes between quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry from the UK Biobank cohort
Authors
Paul A Swinton
Kirsty J Elliott-Sale
Craig Sale
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Archives of Osteoporosis / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 1862-3522
Electronic ISSN: 1862-3514
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-023-01287-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Archives of Osteoporosis 1/2023 Go to the issue