ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Hounsfield Unit Utilization in Cervical Spine for Bone Quality Assessment: A Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for degenerative disc disease: a retrospective, two-center comparative analysis of stand-alone cage versus cage-plate constructs.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 · 2026Article
- Coexistence of heterotopic ossification and anterior bone loss after multilevel cervical disc arthroplasty: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- Predictive efficacy of phantom-less calibration of computed tomography for cage subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.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 · 2026Article
- CT Hounsfield units in cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament-A comparison with other forms of degenerative cervical myelopathy using propensity score matching.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Synergistic predictive value of MRI-based vertebral bone quality and CT hounsfield units for postoperative sagittal balance deterioration after cervical laminoplasty.Frontiers in surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bone mineral density (BMD) is an essential indicator of bone strength and plays a crucial role in the clinical management of various spinal pathologies. Hounsfield units (HUs) calculated from computed tomography (CT) scans are a well-established, effective, and non-invasive method to determine bone density in the lumbar spine when juxtaposed to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans, the gold standard for assessing trabecular bone density. Only recently have studies begun to investigate and establish HUs as a reliable and valid alternative for bone quality assessment in the cervical spine as well. In addition, multiple recent studies have identified cervical HUs as an accurate predictor of cage subsidence, an undesired complication of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) procedures. Subsidence involves migration of the spinal fusion cage into vertebral bodies, causing a loss of disk space, negatively altering spine alignment, and possibly necessitating further unwanted surgical intervention. Using the PRISMA-ScR checklist and the registered scoping review protocol (INPLASY2024100126), this review explores the current research on the use of cervical spine HU measurements as both a determinant of BMD and as a prognosticator of postoperative subsidence following cervical spine procedures (i.e., ACDFs and ACCFs) with the aim of improving clinical and surgical outcomes.
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.