PLoS ONE (Jan 2022)

Comparison of quantitative ultrasonography and dual X-ray absorptiometry for bone status assessment in South African children living with HIV.

  • Jackson A Roberts,
  • Yanhan Shen,
  • Renate Strehlau,
  • Faeezah Patel,
  • Louise Kuhn,
  • Ashraf Coovadia,
  • Jonathan J Kaufman,
  • Stephanie Shiau,
  • Stephen M Arpadi,
  • Michael T Yin

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276290
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 10
p. e0276290

Abstract

Read online

Children living with HIV (CLHIV) have decreased bone mineral content (BMC) and density (BMD), increasing risk for fracture and future osteoporosis. While DXA is the gold-standard for bone assessments, it lacks availability in resource-constrained settings (RCS). Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) offers an alternative owing to its portability, low cost, ease of handling, and lack of ionizing radiation. While QUS has detected reduced bone quality in CLHIV, the relationship between QUS and DXA in this population remains unexplored. At baseline and 12 months, BMC and BMD of the whole body, lumbar spine, and radius were measured by DXA in a longitudinal cohort of CLHIV in Johannesburg, South Africa. Calcaneal speed of sound (SOS) and broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA) and radius SOS were obtained by QUS, and calcaneal stiffness index (SI) was calculated. Spearman correlations, with and without HIV stratification, were performed between QUS and DXA measurements at each visit and for absolute difference in measurements between visits. At baseline and 12-months, calcaneal BUA and SI displayed strong positive correlations with DXA, with only modest correlations between radial QUS and DXA at baseline. Longitudinal measures of QUS did not correlate with DXA. At both baseline and 12-months, individuals with DXA whole-body BMD z-score < -1 displayed significantly lower calcaneal BUA and SI. Cross-sectionally, calcaneal QUS correlates strongly with whole body DXA and may represent a viable diagnostic alternative in RCS. Longitudinally, the two methods do not correlate well, possibly reflecting that each method assesses distinct aspects of bone architecture.