Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39738829›Full record

ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2025

Assessment of trabecular bone Hounsfield units in the lumbar spine for osteoporosis evaluation in individuals aged 65 and above: a review.

Ahmed Alharthy

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Systemic bone loss measured by routine CT is associated with increased pain, postural decompensation, and survival in multiple myeloma.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Simplified sagittal slice HU measurement as a practical alternative to conventional axial HU in opportunistic osteoporosis screening.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

1 author.

Ahmed AlharthyKing Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. atalharthy@kau.edu.sa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2276-7988

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a prevalent condition that significantly increases fracture risk, particularly in the elderly population. Despite its widespread occurrence, osteoporosis is often underdiagnosed and inadequately managed. Traditional diagnostic methods, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), have limitations in terms of accessibility and accuracy, necessitating exploration of alternative diagnostic approaches.This review aims to evaluate the diagnostic potential of Hounsfield Unit (HU) values derived from abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans, specifically focusing on the trabecular bone of the lumbar spine, for osteoporosis assessment in individuals aged 65 and older. The review seeks to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic performance of HU values in distinguishing between normal bone density, osteopenia, and osteoporosis, and to identify areas for further investigation to establish standardized diagnostic criteria.This review compiles existing studies on the use of HU values from abdominal CT scans for osteoporosis diagnosis. It examines the relationship between HU values and DXA T-scores, analyzes optimal HU thresholds for classifying bone density categories, and explores the potential of CT scans as a viable alternative to DXA.The findings indicate that HU values from abdominal CT scans show strong correlations with DXA T-scores, suggesting a promising diagnostic tool for assessing bone density and quality. HU values have demonstrated the ability to differentiate between osteopenia, osteoporosis, and normal bone density, with varying sensitivity and specificity depending on the established HU threshold. CT scans are identified as a scalable, cost-effective alternative to DXA, with the added benefit of utilizing routine abdominal CT scans, which are often conducted for other clinical reasons, thereby reducing additional costs and radiation exposure.HU values derived from abdominal CT scans represent a promising approach for osteoporosis screening, offering a potential solution for routine, cost-effective, and accurate diagnosis, especially in older adults. However, there is a need for standardized HU thresholds and further research to refine diagnostic criteria and enhance the accuracy of osteoporosis detection. Establishing standardized guidelines would improve diagnostic consistency and facilitate early intervention, potentially improving patient outcomes and reducing healthcare burdens.

Indexed as

Cancellous BoneLumbar VertebraeOsteoporosisAbsorptiometry, PhotonAgedAged, 80 and overBone DensityBone Diseases, MetabolicHumansRadiography, AbdominalSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedAbdominal CTBone density measurement (BMU)Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)Elderly populationHounsfield unit (HU)Osteoporosis

Identifiers

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.