ArticleJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2024
Side specific differences of Hounsfield-Units in the osteoporotic lumbar spine.
Article in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of Hybrid Cement-Augmented Pedicle Screw Fixation in Complicated Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Fractures: A Single-Centre Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Biomechanical evaluation of individual 3D-printed vertebrae.BMC biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Does Resistance Indicate Malposition? A Standardized Comparison of Pedicle Screw Placement.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Does Malpositioning of Pedicle Screws Affect Biomechanical Stability in a Novel Quasistatic Test Setup?Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Automated Volumetric Assessment of Hounsfield Units Using a Deep-Reasoning and Learning Model: Correlations with DXA Metrics.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Cancellous Bone Density from C3 to L5 in 11 Body Donors: CT Versus Micro-CT Measurements.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gold standard for determining bone density as a surrogate parameter of bone quality is measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), most commonly performed on the lumbar spine (L1-L4). Computed tomography (CT) data are often available for surgical planning prior to spine procedures, but currently this information is not standardized for bone quality assessment. Besides, measuring the Hounsfield-Units (HU) is also of great importance in the context of biomechanical studies. This Methods: One hundred and seventy-six vertebrae (L1-L4) from 44 body donors (age 84.0±8.7 years) were studied. DXA measurements were obtained on the complete vertebrae to determine BMD, as well as axial CT scans with a slice thickness of 1 mm. Using Mimics Innovation Suite image processing software (Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium), two volumes (whole vertebra Results: Whole bone and spongious HU correlated significantly (P>0.001; α=0.01) with BMD. A positive linear correlation was found, which was more pronounced for whole bone HU (R=0.72) than for spongious HU (R=0.62). When comparing the left and right sides within each vertebra, the HU was found to be 10% larger on average on one side compared to the opposite side. In some cases, the difference of left and right spongious bone can be up to 170%. There is a tendency for the side comparison to be larger for the spongious HU than for the whole vertebra. Conclusions: Determination of HU from clinical CT scans is an important tool for assessing bone quality, primarily by including the cortical portion in the calculation of HU. Unlike BMD, HU can be used to distinguish precisely between individual regions. Some of the very large side-specific gradients of the HU indicate an enormous application potential for preoperative patient-specific planning.
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.