ArticleNeurospine2024
Utility of Radiographic Parameter in Assessing Bone Density and Subsequent Fractures in Patients With Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fracture.
Article in Neurospine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the ability of radiological parameter canal bone ratio (CBR) to assess bone mineral density and to differentiate between patients with primary and multiple osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on OVCF patients treated at our hospital. CBR was measured through full-spine x-rays. Patients were categorized into primary and multiple fracture groups. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and area under the curve (AUC) calculation were used to assess the ability of parameters to predict osteoporosis and multiple fractures. Predictors of T values were analyzed by multiple linear regression, and independent risk factors for multiple fractures were determined by multiple logistic regression analysis.
resultsCBR showed a moderate negative correlation with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry T values (r = -0.642, p < 0.01). Higher CBR (odds ratio [OR], -6.483; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.234 to -4.732; p < 0.01) and lower body mass index (OR, 0.054; 95% CI, 0.023-0.086; p < 0.01) were independent risk factors for osteoporosis. Patients with multiple fractures had lower T values (mean ± standard deviation [SD]: -3.76 ± 0.73 vs. -2.83 ± 0.75, p < 0.01) and higher CBR (mean ± SD: 0.54 ± 0.07 vs. 0.46 ± 0.06, p < 0.01). CBR had an AUC of 0.819 in predicting multiple fractures with a threshold of 0.53. T values prediction had an AUC of 0.816 with a threshold of -3.45. CBR > 0.53 was an independent risk factor for multiple fractures (OR, 14.66; 95% CI, 4.97-43.22; p < 0.01).
conclusionCBR is negatively correlated with bone mineral density (BMD) and can be a novel opportunistic BMD assessment method. It is a simple and effective measurement index for predicting multiple fractures, with predictive performance not inferior to T values.
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.