Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33583827›Full record

ArticleAnatomy & cell biology2021

A comparison, using X-ray micro-computed tomography, of the architecture of cancellous bone from the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine using 240 vertebral bodies from 10 body donors.

Guido Schröder, Benjamin Jabke, Marko Schulze, Andreas Wree, Heiner Martin, Olga Sahmel, Alexandra Doerell, Claus Maximilian Kullen, Reimer Andresen, Hans-Christof Schober

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anatomy & cell biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Guido SchröderClinic for Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Buetzow, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9953-3987
Benjamin JabkeDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical School Rostock, Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9647-0888
Marko SchulzeInstitute of Anatomy, University Medical School Rostock, Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8189-811X
Andreas WreeInstitute of Anatomy, University Medical School Rostock, Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6446-0095
Heiner MartinInstitute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Rostock, Rostock-Warnemuende, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8104-8158
Olga SahmelInstitute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Rostock, Rostock-Warnemuende, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3158-1066
Alexandra DoerellFaculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2147-1613
Claus Maximilian KullenInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology/Neuroradiology, Westkuestenklinikum Heide, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Universities of Kiel, Luebeck and Hamburg, Heide, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6697-9408
Reimer AndresenInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology/Neuroradiology, Westkuestenklinikum Heide, Academic Teaching Hospital of the Universities of Kiel, Luebeck and Hamburg, Heide, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1575-525X
Hans-Christof SchoberDepartment of Internal Medicine IV, Municipal Hospital Suedstadt Rostock, Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4901-6671
University of Rostock · DEKlinik Preetz · DEUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The vertebral trabecular bone has a complex three-dimensional microstructure with an inhomogeneous morphology. Correct identification and assessment of the weakest segments of the cancellous bone may lead to better prediction of fracture risk. The aim of this study was to compare cancellous bone from 240 vertebrae of the cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine of ten body donors with osteoporosis in regard to bone volume fraction (BVF), trabecular thickness, separation, trabecular number and degree of anisotropy, to ascertain why cervical vertebrae rarely fracture, even with severe osteoporosis. Samples were obtained from all vertebrae with a Jamshidi needle (8 Gauge). The investigations were performed with a micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) device (SKYSCAN 1172, RJL Micro & Analytic GmbH, Karlsdorf-Neuthard, Germany). Existing vertebral fractures and the bone mineral density of the lumbar spine were assessed with quantitative CT. Regarding the micro-CT parameters, statistically significant differences were observed between the various sections of the spine. We found a higher BVF, trabecular number and trabecular thickness, as well as a lower trabecular separation of the cervical vertebrae compared to other vertebrae. In addition, the degree of anisotropy in the cervical spine is lower than in the other spinal column sections. These results are age and sex dependent. Thus, the cervical spine has special structural features, whose causes must be determined in further investigations.

Indexed as

AgingOsteoporosisSpineX-ray microtomography

Identifiers

PMID33583827
PMCPMC8017461
OpenAlexW3132715642

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.