Assessment of Bone Density and Microarchitecture In Vivo Using High-Resolution Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography
Publication Date: May 1, 2020
Last Updated: March 14, 2022
Summary of recommendations
Scan acquisition and analysis
The method of selecting scan site should be clearly indicated. The relative offset outlined in this article and described in detail elsewhere [Bonaretti S, et al.Osteoporos Int 28:2115–2128] is recommended. However, a fixed offset may be used when comparing to historical datasets.
6731
Image processing should use direct measurement methods following the extended cortical analysis. Automatically generated contours should be checked and manually corrected for errors following guidelines outlined in detail elsewhere [Whittier DE et al. Osteoporos Int].
6731
μFE analysis should use standardized constitutive properties and boundary conditions. μFE specifications outlined in Table 4 are recommended for first-generation HR-pQCT and can be compared using harmonizing techniques. For second-generation HR-pQCT analysis, an elastic modulus of 10,000 MPa with axial boundary conditions and a yield criterion of 1.0% critical strain and 5% critical volume is recommended.
6731
Having trouble viewing table?
Table 4 Summary of elastic modulus, boundary conditions, and common yield criterion for first- and second-generation HR-pQCT. All models applied a 1% compressive strain in the axial direction and used a Poisson’s ratio of 0.3. Unless specified, the proposed yield criterion and associated constitutive properties were compared with mechanical compressive loading tests; however, loading configurations relative to the scan region vary across studies.
* Original validation studies were conducted using a 3D-pQCT scanner with 165 μm isotropic resolution; however, these parameter specifications have been frequently applied to first-generation HR-pQCT
† Yield criterion with associated tissue properties and boundary conditions were not explicitly validated in this study.
| Reference | Elastic modulus (MPa) | Boundary conditions | Yield criterion (critical strain, critical volume) |
| First-generation HR-pQCT | |||
| Pistoia et al. Bone. 2002/Pistoia et al. J Clin. Dens. 2004* | 10,000 | Axial | 0.7%, 2% |
| MacNeil et al. Bone 2008 | 6829 | Uniaxial | 0.7%, 2% |
| Mueller et al. Bone 2009 | 6829 | Uniaxial | 0.7%, 7.5% |
| Vilayphiou et al. Bone 2010† | Trabecular bone: 17,000 Cortical bone: 20,000 |
Axial | 0.35%, 2% |
| Second-generation HR-pQCT | |||
| Whittier et al. J Biomech 2018 | 8748 | Uniaxial | 0.7%, 2% |
| Arias-Moreno Osteoporosis Int 2019 | 10,000 | Axial | 1.0%, 5% |
† Yield criterion with associated tissue properties and boundary conditions were not explicitly validated in this study.
Longitudinal studies should employ 3D or 2D registration and exclude scans with less than 75% overlap. μFE should not be applied to 3D-registered scans and instead 2D-registered or unregistered scans should be used.
6731
Overview
Title
Assessment of Bone Density and Microarchitecture In Vivo Using High-Resolution Peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography
Authoring Organization
American Society for Bone and Mineral Research