Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35669688›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022

Level-Specific Volumetric BMD Threshold Values for the Prediction of Incident Vertebral Fractures Using Opportunistic QCT: A Case-Control Study.

Michael Dieckmeyer, Maximilian Thomas Löffler, Malek El Husseini, Anjany Sekuboyina, Bjoern Menze, Nico Sollmann, Maria Wostrack, Claus Zimmer, Thomas Baum, Jan Stefan Kirschke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. CT image-based biomarkers for opportunistic screening of osteoporotic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael DieckmeyerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Maximilian Thomas LöfflerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Malek El HusseiniDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Anjany SekuboyinaDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Bjoern MenzeImage-Based Biomedical Modeling, Department of Computer Science, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Nico SollmannDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Maria WostrackDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Claus ZimmerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Thomas BaumDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Jan Stefan KirschkeDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Klinikum rechts der Isar · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To establish and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) threshold values at different spinal levels, derived from opportunistic quantitative computed tomography (QCT), for the prediction of incident vertebral fractures (VF). Materials and Methods: In this case-control study, 35 incident VF cases (23 women, 12 men; mean age: 67 years) and 70 sex- and age-matched controls were included, based on routine multi detector CT (MDCT) scans of the thoracolumbar spine. Trabecular vBMD was measured from routine baseline CT scans of the thoracolumbar spine using an automated pipeline including vertebral segmentation, asynchronous calibration for HU-to-vBMD conversion, and correction of intravenous contrast medium (https://anduin.bonescreen.de). Threshold values at T1-L5 were calculated for the optimal operating point according to the Youden index and for fixed sensitivities (60 - 85%) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: vBMD at each single level of the thoracolumbar spine was significantly associated with incident VFs (odds ratio per SD decrease [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] at T1-T4: 3.28, 1.66-6.49; at T5-T8: 3.28, 1.72-6.26; at T9-T12: 3.37, 1.78-6.36; and at L1-L4: 3.98, 1.97-8.06), independent of adjustment for age, sex, and prevalent VF. AUC showed no significant difference between vertebral levels and was highest at the thoracolumbar junction (AUC = 0.75, 95%-CI = 0.63 - 0.85 for T11-L2). Optimal threshold values increased from lumbar (L1-L4: 52.0 mg/cm³) to upper thoracic spine (T1-T4: 69.3 mg/cm³). At T11-L2, T12-L3 and L1-L4, a threshold of 80.0 mg/cm³ showed sensitivities of 85 - 88%, and specificities of 41 - 49%. To achieve comparable sensitivity (85%) at more superior spinal levels, resulting thresholds were higher: 114.1 mg/cm³ (T1-T4), 92.0 mg/cm³ (T5-T8), 88.2 mg/cm³ (T9-T12). Conclusions: At all levels of the thoracolumbar spine, lower vBMD was associated with incident VFs in an elderly, predominantly oncologic patient population. Automated opportunistic osteoporosis screening of vBMD along the entire thoracolumbar spine allows for risk assessment of imminent VFs. We propose level-specific vBMD threshold at the thoracolumbar spine to identify individuals at high fracture risk.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeSpinal FracturesAgedBone DensityCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleTomography, X-Ray Computedbone mineral density (BMD)multidetector computed tomography (MDCT)osteoporosisspinal fracturethreshold value

Identifiers

PMID35669688
PMCPMC9165054
OpenAlexW4285740801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.