Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21344275›Full record

ReviewClinical orthopaedics and related research2011

High-resolution computed tomography for clinical imaging of bone microarchitecture.

Andrew J Burghardt, Thomas M Link, Sharmila Majumdar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 127 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
127citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

127 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. TranslatingFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew J BurghardtMusculoskeletal Quantitative Imaging Research Group, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, Campus Box 2520, QB3 Building, 2nd Floor, Suite 203, 1700 4th Street, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA.
Thomas M Link
Sharmila Majumdar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe role of bone structure, one component of bone quality, has emerged as a contributor to bone strength. The application of high-resolution imaging in evaluating bone structure has evolved from an in vitro technology for small specimens to an emerging clinical research tool for in vivo studies in humans. However, many technical and practical challenges remain to translate these techniques into established clinical outcomes. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We reviewed use of high-resolution CT for evaluating trabecular microarchitecture and cortical ultrastructure of bone specimens ex vivo, extension of these techniques to in vivo human imaging studies, and recent studies involving application of high-resolution CT to characterize bone structure in the context of skeletal disease.

methodsWe performed the literature review using PubMed and Google Scholar. Keywords included CT, MDCT, micro-CT, high-resolution peripheral CT, bone microarchitecture, and bone quality.

resultsSpecimens can be imaged by micro-CT at a resolution starting at 1 μm, but in vivo human imaging is restricted to a voxel size of 82 μm (with actual spatial resolution of ~ 130 μm) due to technical limitations and radiation dose considerations. Presently, this mode is limited to peripheral skeletal regions, such as the wrist and tibia. In contrast, multidetector CT can assess the central skeleton but incurs a higher radiation burden on the subject and provides lower resolution (200-500 μm).

conclusionsCT currently provides quantitative measures of bone structure and may be used for estimating bone strength mathematically. The techniques may provide clinically relevant information by enhancing our understanding of fracture risk and establishing the efficacy of antifracture for osteoporosis and other bone metabolic disorders.

Indexed as

Bone and BonesImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiation DosageTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID21344275
PMCPMC3126972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.