Supine vs decubitus lateral patient positioning in vertebral fracture assessment.

In vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), lateral scans are obtained with the patient positioned supine (C-arm densitometers) or lateral decubitus (fixed-arm densitometers). We aimed to determine the impact of positioning on image quality and fracture definition. We performed supine and decubitus lateral VFA in 50 postmenopausal women and used the algorithm-based qualitative method to identify vertebral fractures. We compared the 2 techniques for the identification of fractures (kappa analysis) and compared the numbers of unreadable vertebrae (indiscernible endplates) and vertebrae that were projected obliquely (Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test). The kappa score for agreement between the VFA techniques (to identify women with vertebral fractures) was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.99), and for agreement with fracture assessments made from radiographs, kappa was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.57-0.94) for both supine and decubitus lateral VFA. There were more unreadable vertebrae with supine lateral (48 vertebrae in supine lateral compared with 14 in decubitus lateral; p=0.001), but oblique projection was less common (93 vertebrae compared with 145 in decubitus lateral; p=0.002). We conclude that there were significantly different projection effects with supine and decubitus lateral VFA, but these differences did not influence the identification of vertebral fractures in our study sample.

Vertebral Fracture Assessment: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions.

Vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) is an established, low radiation method for detection of prevalent vertebral fractures. Vertebral fractures are usually not recognized clinically at the time of their occurrence, but their presence indicates a substantial risk for subsequent fractures independent of bone mineral density. Significant evidence supporting VFA use for many post-menopausal women and older men has accumulated since the last ISCD Official Position Statement on VFA was published. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry considered the following issues at the 2007 Position Development Conference: (1) What are appropriate indications for Vertebral Fracture Assessment; (2) What is the most appropriate method of vertebral fracture detection with VFA; (3) What is the sensitivity and specificity for detection of vertebral fractures with this method; (4) When should additional spine imaging be performed following a VFA; and (5) What are the reporting obligations for those interpreting VFA images?

Algorithm-based qualitative and semiquantitative identification of prevalent vertebral fracture: agreement between different readers, imaging modalities, and diagnostic approaches.

UNLABELLED: We compared SQ and ABQ diagnosis of VF imaged by radiography and X-ray absorptiometry. Mild ABQ VF had stronger associations with osteoporosis than mild SQ VF. Interobserver agreement (radiographic diagnosis) was better for ABQ. INTRODUCTION: Vertebral fracture (VF) assessment from images acquired by X-ray absorptiometry (VFA) is often based on a semiquantitative approach (SQ); prevalent VF is identified if vertebral height appears reduced by >20%. Algorithm-based qualitative definition of osteoporotic VF (ABQ) requires evidence of endplate depression, and there is no threshold for reduction in vertebral height. The aims of this study were to (1) compare the prevalence of VFs; (2) compare the characteristics of women with and without VFs; (3) compare interobserver agreement; and (4) compare agreement between methods and imaging modalities for ABQ and SQ definitions of VFs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Spine radiographs and absorptiometry images for 203 elderly women were assessed using ABQ (readers ABQ-1 and ABQ-2). These readings were compared with SQ assessments (readers SQ-1 and SQ-2) of the same images performed in a previous study. Agreement between readers and methods was assessed by kappa (kappa) statistics. RESULTS: The prevalence of VF was 15-18% (radiography) and 12-24% (VFA) for ABQ and SQ, respectively. Women with ABQ or SQ fractures were older and had lower BMD than those without fracture (p < 0.01). Mild ABQ (but not SQ) VF was associated with low BMD. Kappa scores for interobserver agreement for radiography and VFA, respectively, were as follows: ABQ, kappa = 0.74 (95% CI, 0.60, 0.87) and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.48, 0.81); SQ, kappa = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.46, 0.60) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.44, 0.58). For agreement between ABQ-1 and SQ-1, kappa = 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39, 0.72) for radiography and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.25, 0.58 for VFA. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of radiographic VF identified by ABQ and SQ was similar, but on VFA was 50% higher for SQ. Mild ABQ VF was associated with low BMD. Interobserver agreement for radiographic diagnosis was significantly better for ABQ than for SQ. Agreement between ABQ and SQ was moderate.

Comparison of densitometric and radiographic vertebral fracture assessment using the algorithm-based qualitative (ABQ) method in postmenopausal women at low and high risk of fracture.

UNLABELLED: Using ABQ diagnosis, the sensitivity to detect VF of densitometric versus radiographic assessment in 755 postmenopausal women was 71-81% and specificity was 97%. Misdiagnosis was influenced by image quality and was more common for mild deformities. INTRODUCTION: Using densitometric vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), prevalent fractures are identified when vertebral height appears reduced by >or=20%. However, this approach does not discriminate between osteoporotic vertebral fracture (VF) and nonosteoporotic deformity, which increases the false-positive rate. Algorithm-based qualitative diagnosis (ABQ) focuses on vertebral endplate fracture to exclude these deformities but has not been applied in VFA. We wished to determine whether densitometric image quality is adequate for ABQ assessment. Our aims were to (1) calculate agreement between VFA and radiography using ABQ to identify prevalent VF and (2) identify the primary reasons for any discordant diagnosis. METHODS: Radiographic and densitometric spine images for postmenopausal women at low risk (LR; n = 459) and high risk (HR; n = 298) of VF were assessed using ABQ. Agreement between imaging modalities for VF diagnosis was assessed by kappa statistics using ABQ radiographic readings as the gold standard. RESULTS: The prevalence of VF was 11-29% (radiography) and 9-26% (VFA) in the LR and HR groups, respectively. Agreement between imaging modalities was good or very good (kappa = 0.62-0.81 in the LR and HR populations). The sensitivity to detect women with VF by VFA was 71% and 84% in the LR and HR populations, respectively, and specificity was 97%. Fifty-two (77%) and 60 (61%) of vertebrae misclassified by VFA in the LR and HR populations were mild fractures and 37 (54%) and 62 (63%) were wedge fractures. One third of fractures missed by VFA were related to poor or unreadable image quality (n = 27 and 28 vertebrae in the LR and HR populations, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There was good agreement between VFA and radiography using ABQ to identify prevalent VF in women at LR or HR of osteoporotic VF. Vertebrae misclassified by VFA were primarily mild fractures or deformities, and two thirds of all fractures missed by VFA were related to poor or unreadable image quality.

Identification of vertebral fracture and non-osteoporotic short vertebral height in men: the MrOS study.

UNLABELLED: Non-osteoporotic SVH may mimic VF but is excluded in ABQ. In men, this led to discordance between ABQ and other methods, but SVH was not linked to low bone density. Exclusion of SVH could reduce false positives. INTRODUCTION: Non-osteoporotic short vertebral height (SVH) may mimic vertebral fracture (VF). The aims were to (1) compare the prevalence of VF in elderly men using the algorithm-based qualitative (ABQ), semiquantitative (SQ), and triage-quantitative morphometric (triage-QM) methods; (2) identify reasons for discordance between methods; and (3) determine whether SVH identified by ABQ is linked to low BMD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a subset of 732 men ages > or =65 yr participating in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study. Criteria for VF were (1) ABQ: endplate depression; (2) SQ: estimated vertebral height reduction > or =20%; (3) triage-QM: vertebral height ratio >3 SD below the reference mean, on radiographs showing evidence of VF. Criteria for SVH (ABQ) were apparent "reduction" in vertebral height > or = approximately 15%, without evidence of endplate depression. RESULTS: The prevalence of at least one VF was 10% (ABQ); 13% (SQ) and 11% (QM-triage) and of at least one SVH (ABQ) was >50%. Agreement between methods was moderate (kappa = 0.42-0.62). Discordance between methods related mainly to classification of mild thoracic wedging or possible traumatic VF by ABQ. Mean BMD was lower in men with VF (any diagnostic method) than in those without (two-sample t-test, p < 0.05). For ABQ, BMD was similar in men with SVH (no VF) and men with normal vertebrae (ANOVA, p > 0.05). Mean BMD was significantly lower than expected in 40 men with VF identified by all three methods and average or more than average in those identified by a single method. CONCLUSIONS: Among elderly men (1) the prevalence of VF ranges from 10% to 13%: (2) agreement between diagnostic methods is moderate: discordance relates mainly to differential classification of mild thoracic deformities or ABQ definition of VF as traumatic; and (3) SVH identified by ABQ is common and not linked to low BMD.

Vertebral fracture assessment: the 2005 ISCD Official Positions.

Vertebral Fracture Assessment (VFA) is a low radiation method for imaging the thoraco-lumbar spine using bone densitometers. VFA can easily be performed at the time of bone mineral density (BMD) measurement, allowing integration of BMD and vertebral fracture information into clinical patient care. As VFA is a relatively new procedure, it has received limited study and heretofore has not had widespread clinical application. Consequently, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) considered the following VFA issues at the 2005 Position Development Conference: (1) indications for VFA; (2) methodology for the diagnosis of vertebral fractures using VFA; and (3) indications for additional imaging after VFA. The ISCD Official Positions with respect to the above issues, as well as the rationale and evidence used to derive these positions, are presented here.