The objective of this study was to undertake an in vivo cross calibration of body composition, whole body bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD) between a Hologic QDR2000 and a GE Healthcare Lunar Prodigy. Twenty-one subjects attending for routine bone densitometry were recruited to the study (19 female and 2 male, aged 30-79 yr). Phantom cross calibrations were carried out using the Bio-Imaging Variable Composition Phantom (VCP) for percentage fat (%fat) and the Bona Fide Phantom (BFP) for BMD. There was no significant difference in whole body lean body mass between the QDR2000 and the Prodigy. Fat mass (FM) and %fat were significantly higher on the QDR2000. BMC and whole body BMD were significantly higher on Prodigy. As the BMC increased, so did the difference between the 2 instruments. The VCP did not provide an adequate cross calibration of %fat compared with in vivo. The BFP provided a good cross calibration of whole body BMD compared with in vivo. The results suggest that the partitioning of the soft tissue component between lean and fat in the 2 instruments is systematically different. The variation between instruments from the same and different manufacturers reported in the literature varies widely, as does the comparison with criterion methods. This makes it difficult to generalize the results of this study to other centers and it is recommended that each center would have to cross calibrate when changing equipment.
Copyright © 2011 The International Society for Clinical Densitometry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.