4.0 Article

A pilot study of heel ultrasound to screen for low bone mass in children with leukemia

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC HEMATOLOGY ONCOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages 427-432

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.mph.0000212946.28103.29

Keywords

bone mass; calcaneal ultrasound; dual x-ray absorptiometry; broadband ultrasound attenuation; allogeneic bone marrow transplantation

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01 RR00084] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [K24 DK062895-02] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The optimal method to assess pediatric bone mass remains controversial. Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is commonly used but quantitative ultrasound is less expensive, free of ionizing radiation, and predicts fractures as well as DXA does, in adults. Broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) was determined using a portable calcaneal ultrasonometer and, compared with DXA derived a real bone mineral density (BMD) values in 42 young patients (ages 4.5 to 20.3 y) with leukemia. Reduced BMD was defined as a DXA z score of < - 1. Mean z scores for lumbar spine BMD were significantly lower than zero (- 0.77 +/- 1.23 SD, P = 0.0004). Mean z scores for whole body BMD were also significantly lower than different from 0 (- 0.34 +/- 1.04 SD, P = 0.05). Calcaneal BUA was highly correlated with DXA measurement of lumbar, whole body, and femoral neck BMD. BUA was significantly associated with the probability of having a reduced lumbar BMD 7 score (P = 0.03) and having a reduced whole body z score of (P = 0.03). Area under the receiver operator characteristic curves for model including BUA predicting reduced bone density by DXA were 0.77 and 0.86 for lumbar and whole body 7 score cutoffs, respectively. Our data suggest that calcaneal BUA may serve as a reliable screening tool to detect reduced bone mass in pediatric patients with leukemia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available