ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Differentiation of Traumatic Osteoporotic and Non-Osteoporotic Vertebral AO A3 Fractures by Analyzing the Posterior Edge Morphology-A Retrospective Feasibility Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of machine learning in prediction of bone cement leakage during single-level thoracolumbar percutaneous vertebroplasty.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Osteoporotic Vertebral Body Fractures: New Trends in Differential Diagnosis, Bracing and Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDifferentiation between traumatic osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic vertebral fractures is crucial for optimal therapy planning. We postulated that the morphology of the posterior edge of the cranial fragment of A3 vertebral fractures is different in these entities. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate a simple method to differentiate between osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic A3 vertebral fractures by morphological analysis.
methodsA total of 86 computer tomography scans of AO Type A3 (cranial burst) vertebral body fractures (52 non-osteoporotic, 34 osteoporotic) were included in this retrospective study. Posterior edge morphology was analyzed using the sagittal paramedian slice with the most prominent shaped bulging. Later, the degree of bulging of the posterior edge fragment was quantified using a geometric approach. Additionally, the Hounsfield units of the broken vertebral body, the vertebra above, and the vertebra below the fracture were measured.
resultsWe found significant differences in the extent of bulging comparing osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic fractures in our cohort. Using the presented method, sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 96%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 94%. In contrast, by evaluating the Hounsfield units, sensitivity was 94%, specificity 94% and the PPV was 91%.
conclusionsOur method of analysis of the bulging of the dorsal edge fragment in traumatic cranial burst fractures cases allows, in our cases, a simple and valid differentiation between osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic fractures. Further validation in a larger sample, including dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements, is necessary.
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.