Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38717516›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2024

An Automated Vertebrae Localization, Segmentation, and Osteoporotic Compression Fracture Detection Pipeline for Computed Tomographic Imaging.

İlkay Yıldız Potter, Edward K Rodriguez, Jim Wu, Ara Nazarian, Ashkan Vaziri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

İlkay Yıldız PotterBioSensics, LLC, 57 Chapel Street, Newton, MA, 02458, USA. ilkay.yildiz@biosensics.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2827-7672
Edward K RodriguezCarl J. Shapiro Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Stoneman 10, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Jim WuDepartment of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Shapiro 4, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Ara Nazarian *Carl J. Shapiro Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Stoneman 10, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Ashkan Vaziri *BioSensics, LLC, 57 Chapel Street, Newton, MA, 02458, USA.

Funding

Software Platform for Automatic, Opportunistic Screening of Vertebral Compression FracturesR44AG084327 · NIA · BIOSENSICS, LLC · PI NAZARIAN, ARA, VAZIRI, ASHKAN · 2023 to 2025
$2.0M
NIA NIH HHS R44 AG084327NIA NIH HHS R44AG084327
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis is the most common chronic metabolic bone disease worldwide. Vertebral compression fracture (VCF) is the most common type of osteoporotic fracture. Approximately 700,000 osteoporotic VCFs are diagnosed annually in the USA alone, resulting in an annual economic burden of ~$13.8B. With an aging population, the rate of osteoporotic VCFs and their associated burdens are expected to rise. Those burdens include pain, functional impairment, and increased medical expenditure. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to develop an analytical tool to aid in the identification of VCFs. Computed Tomography (CT) imaging is commonly used to detect occult injuries. Unlike the existing VCF detection approaches based on CT, the standard clinical criteria for determining VCF relies on the shape of vertebrae, such as loss of vertebral body height. We developed a novel automated vertebrae localization, segmentation, and osteoporotic VCF detection pipeline for CT scans using state-of-the-art deep learning models to bridge this gap. To do so, we employed a publicly available dataset of spine CT scans with 325 scans annotated for segmentation, 126 of which also graded for VCF (81 with VCFs and 45 without VCFs). Our approach attained 96% sensitivity and 81% specificity in detecting VCF at the vertebral-level, and 100% accuracy at the subject-level, outperforming deep learning counterparts tested for VCF detection without segmentation. Crucially, we showed that adding predicted vertebrae segments as inputs significantly improved VCF detection at both vertebral and subject levels by up to 14% Sensitivity and 20% Specificity (p-value = 0.028).

Indexed as

Fractures, CompressionOsteoporotic FracturesSpinal FracturesTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedDeep LearningFemaleHumansMaleSpineComputed tomographyDeep learningOsteoporosisVertebral compression fracture

Identifiers

PMID38717516
PMCPMC11522205

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.