ArticlePolish journal of radiology2013
Application of geometrical measurements in the assessment of vertebral strength.
Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automatic measurement of anatomical parameters of the lumbar vertebral body and the intervertebral disc on radiographs by deep learning.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- The ratio of anterior and posterior vertebral heights reinforces the utility of DXA in assessment of vertebrae strength.Calcified tissue international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe study was aimed at the development of parameters that could be used as predictors of vertebral strength. Proposed parameters describing vertebral geometry and/or shape can be established on the basis of routine spine roentgenograms, making roentgenography a novel tool for vertebral fracture risk assessment in the future. MATERIAL/
methods20 human cadaveric L3 vertebrae were included in the study. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) was used for an assessment of bone mineral density (BMD). Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) was performed to measure the volumetric bone density as the most reliable parameter in vertebral fracture risk assessment. Geometrical measurements were performed on the basis of high quality and high resolution computer tomography 3-dimensional images. Biomechanical tests were performed to measure vertebral strength. Two parameters were defined on the basis of extensive research: the ratio between vertebral base area and its height (A/H), and the ratio of vertebral coronal width to coronal height (W/H). Correlations between vertebral mechanical strength - its BMD, QCT density, A/H and W/H were calculated.
resultsThe best correlation to bone durability was achieved for QCT density (r=0.882), while correlation strength for BMD (r=0.779) and A/H (r=-0.773) were comparable. W/H correlated better than BMD to mechanical strength (-0.788).
conclusionsGeometrical parameters of vertebrae potentially measured on spine radiograms could be used as predictors of vertebral durability. The calculated correlation coefficients suggest that one of the proposed parameters works better than the commonly used BMD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.