• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.40-45
• /
• 2010

Purpose: Recently, the performance of the X-ray tube was very much improved by the power generation of the technology. However, the overload of equipment is occurred by the increment of the equipment operating time according to the increment of the examination number of cases. The X-ray dose can change by heat occurrence of the X-ray tube due to this. Moreover, the change of the bone mineral density value is possible to occur. Therefore, We tries to whether the change of the bone mineral density value of each equipment according to the difference of the examination number of cases and operating time occur or not. Materials and Methods: The BMD value was measured by the Aluminum Spine Phantom and the European Spine Phantom in each equipment, in order to find out about the difference of the time general classification bone mineral density value by using the Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. And after scanning each phantom by using X-ray dose meter (Unfors Mult-O-Meter), a dose was measured by the same condition. As to, an average and standard deviation were found and the change of each equipment much BMD value was compared and it evaluated. Results: $Mean{\pm}SD$ of each equipment by using the Aluminum Spine Phantom, A equipment was $1.174{\pm}0.002$, $1.171{\pm}0.005$, $1.173{\pm}0.005$, B equipment was $1.186{\pm}0.003$, $1.187{\pm}0.003$, $1.185{\pm}0.003$, C equipment was $1.180{\pm}0.003$, $1.182{\pm}0.004$, $1.183{\pm}0.002$, D equipment was $1.188{\pm}0.004$, $1.185{\pm}0.003$, $1.185{\pm}0.004$. By using the European Spine Phantom, A equipment was $1.143{\pm}0.006$, $1.153{\pm}0.009$, $1.161{\pm}0.003$, B equipment was $1.134{\pm}0.004$, $1.13{\pm}0.008$, $1.127{\pm}0.015$, C equipment was $1.143{\pm}0.006$, $1.134{\pm}0.01$, $1.133{\pm}0.006$, D equipment was $1.14{\pm}0.001$, $1.122{\pm}0.002$, $1.131{\pm}0.008$, altogether included in the normal range. Conclusion: There was no significant change of the BMD value of using a phantom by time zones. Therefore, if the quality control is made to use the extent management method of the equipment for beginning in the present application, the reliability of the BMD equipment will be able to be enhanced.

• Journal of Radiation Industry
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.27-31
• /
• 2017

Reliable follow-up of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is essential in clinical practice. When there is a difference in the BMD values from DXA systems in the same patient, cross calibration equation is required for the reliable follow-up. Unfortunately, no equation is existed in BMD measure between GE Lunar Prodigy Advance (US, GE Healthcare; LPA) and Osteosys Dexxum T (Korea, Osteosys; ODT) DXA systems. In this study, we evaluate the agreement of BMD values between LPA and ODT and suggest the cross calibration equation using European spine phantom (ESP) with two systems. We performed BMD measurements using ten scans with ESP in each DXA systems. We compared BMD values and calculated cross calibration equation by linear regression analysis. The comparison between the LPA and ODT bone densitometers used the ESP. Compared to the ESP BMD values, ODT underestimated 14.36% and LPA overestimated 12.96%. The average of total BMD measurement values acquired with ODT were 21.44% lower than those from LPA. Cross-calibration equation for LPA and ODT was derived from ESP. We calculated simple cross calibration equation for LPA and ODT DXA systems. Cross-calibration equation is necessary for the reliable follow-up of BMD values in two different systems.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.12 no.7
• /
• pp.833-844
• /
• 2018

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry is mainly used as an X-ray test method. For equipment manufactured GE and Hologic, cross-calibration analyses (CCA) of machines from the same manufacturer and between units from different manufacturers have been conducted, but the CCA of equipment manufactured in Korea are inadequate. Through CCA, we present a formula of the intersections between the Korean medical equipment company (KEC) with GE and Hologic manufactured DXA, and among the KEC DXA. The CCA was conducted for the European Spine Phantom on DXA from four KEC and three global medical equipment company (GEC) manufacturers. We compared bone mineral density (BMD) values and calculated the CCA equation by linear regression analysis. The standard-deviations (SD) of the BMD values were highest for the Dexxum T for the low, medium, and high spine, which were 0.030, 0.029, and 0.037, respectively. The smallest SD in the low and medium vertebrae were 0.005 and 0.004 for the Horizon Ci, respectively, and 0.005 for the Osteo Pro Max in the high vertebrae. Based on the intersection equations of the KEC DXA established in this study, CCA of various KEC DXA should be established for more accurate follow-up of BMD tests in clinical environments.