Increased bone mineral density in a man with known compression fractures

An overlying fat panniculus affects femur bone mass measurement

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is currently the gold standard technique for osteoporosis diagnosis. However, DXA has limitations, including artifacts, such as degenerative disease or metallic foreign bodies, that may confound bone mineral density (BMD) results. Because fat folds overlying the proximal femur may alter soft-tissue density in a nonuniform manner, this may be a currently unappreciated confounder of proximal femur BMD measurement. This possibility was evaluated in 127 patients (52 women/75 men) referred for routine BMD measurement who were identified as having a fat panniculus overlying their proximal femur scan area. Presence of a fat panniculus within the scan field was confirmed by visual assessment of images obtained utilizing a GE Lunar Expert-XL. Subsequently, these individuals were rescanned while retracting their fat panniculus away from the femur scan area without other repositioning between scans. In 49% of the men, and 56% of the women, either the femoral neck, trochanter, or total femur BMD differed by more than the least significant change at our facility. No pattern was observed to predict whether BMD would increase or decrease upon fat retraction. Subsequently, 30 patients were scanned using the standard and retracted technique twice, with repositioning between scans to establish precision. Retracted and standard precision was similar. In conclusion, an overlying fat panniculus may alter proximal femur BMD measurement, which would be expected to impair the ability to accurately diagnose low bone mass and monitor osteoporosis therapy. When a fat panniculus overlays the proximal femur scan area, its retraction should be part of routine densitometric practice.

Discrepancy in results between spine and hip scans of a woman with end stage renal disease

Conditions and artifacts such as aortic calcifications, osteophytes, hip prostheses, and metallic objects can affect the results of dual X-ray absorptiometry scans of the spine and hip. Abdominal surgery often entails the use of metal sutures causing subtle artifacts near or over the lumbar spine resulting in inaccurate bone mineral density (BMD) measurements. We herein report a case of a woman whose spine BMD appeared normal while her hip BMD was > -3.5 SDs. Although the abdominal artifacts create some uncertainty in the diagnosis, renal osteodystrophy is suspect owing to the patient's renal history. This case demonstrates the importance of acquiring scans at two or more sites, closely evaluating scans for artifacts, and obtaining the patient's medical history.

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis causes artificially elevated lumbar bone mineral density measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry

A 76-yr-old man with bilateral total hip arthroplasties was referred for a baseline bone mineral density (BMD) measurement. The L1-L4 lumbar bone density revealed a density above the upper expected value for a young individual (i.e., T-score > 2.5) with large intervertebral variation, while the forearm study revealed an osteoporotic measurement. Lumbar spine radiographs demonstrated abundant, flowing ossification of the anterior spinal ligament, predominantly at L3, consistent with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, which accounted for the increased BMD.

Increased hip bone mineral density in a woman with gluteal silicon implant

Conditions and artifacts such as aortic calcification, osteophytes, hip prostheses, and metallic objects can mislead the results of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning of the spine and hip. Gluteal silicon implants increasingly are being used for aesthetic purposes by women in Brazil, some of whom are at an age of high risk for the development of postmenopausal osteoporosis. We herein report a case of a woman whose hip bone mineral density by DXA clearly increased after the placement of bilateral gluteal implants of silicon. This case demonstrates the importance of inquiring about the presence of this artifact to avoid unnecessary evaluation of hip bone densitometry in these situations.