MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403115177 · doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjae163

The quantification of bone mineral density using photon counting computed tomography and its implications for detecting bone remodeling

2024· article· en· W4403115177 on OpenAlexaff
Jilmen Quintiens, Walter Coudyzer, Melissa S. A. M. Bevers, Evie Vereecke, Joop P. van den Bergh, Sarah L. Manske, Harry van Lenthe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersVlaamse regeringKU LeuvenDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsBone mineralNuclear medicineQuantitative computed tomographyRepeatabilityMedicineVoxelMaterials scienceImaging phantomBiomedical engineeringRadiologyPathologyOsteoporosisChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HR-pQCT has become standard practice when quantifying volumetric BMD (vBMD) in vivo. Yet, it is only accessible to peripheral sites, with small fields of view and lengthy scanning times. This limits general applicability in clinical workflows. The goal of this study was to assess the potential of photon counting CT (PCCT) in quantitative bone imaging. Using the European Forearm Phantom, PCCT was calibrated to hydroxyapatite (HA) density. Eight cadaveric forearms were scanned twice with PCCT and once with HR-pQCT. The dominant forearm of two volunteers was scanned twice with PCCT. In each scan, the carpals were delineated. At bone level, accuracy was assessed with a paired measurement of total vBMD (Tt.vBMD) calculated with PCCT and HR-pQCT. At voxel-level, repeatability was assessed by image registration and voxel-wise subtraction of the ex vivo PCCT scans. In an ideal scenario, this difference would be zero; any deviation was interpreted as falsely detected remodeling. For clinical usage, the least detectable remodeling was determined by finding a threshold in the PCCT difference image that resulted in a classification of bone formation and resorption below acceptable noise levels (<0.5%). The paired measurement of Tt.vBMD had a Pearson correlation of 0.986. Compared to HR-pQCT, PCCT showed a bias of 7.46 mgHA/cm3. At voxel-level, the repeated PCCT scans showed a bias of 17.66 mgHA/cm3 and a standard error of 96.23 mgHA/cm3. Least detectable remodeling was found to be 250 mgHA/cm3, for which 0.37% of the voxels was incorrectly classified as newly added or resorbed bone. In vivo, this volume increased to 0.97%. Based on the cadaver data, we conclude that PCCT can be used to quantify vBMD and bone turnover. We provided proof of principle that this technique is also accurate in vivo, hence, that it has high potential for clinical applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207