Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40738977›Full record

ArticleSkeletal radiology2026

Trabecular bone analysis: ultra-high-resolution CT goes far beyond high-resolution CT and gets closer to micro-CT (a study using Canon Medical CT devices).

Romain Gillet, Ulysse Puel, Anas Amer, Mathieu Doyen, Fatma Boubaker, Bouchra Assabah, Gabriela Hossu, Pierre Gillet, Alain Blum, Pedro Augusto Gondim Teixeira

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Skeletal radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

10 authors.

Romain GilletGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France. r.gillet@chru-nancy.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1350-1694
Ulysse PuelGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France.
Anas AmerGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France.
Mathieu DoyenUniversité de Lorraine, INSERM, IADI, 54000, Nancy, France.
Fatma BoubakerGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France.
Bouchra AssabahUniversité de Lorraine, INSERM, IADI, 54000, Nancy, France.
Gabriela HossuUniversité de Lorraine, INSERM, IADI, 54000, Nancy, France.
Pierre GilletUniversité de Lorraine, CNRS, Nancy, IMoPA, France.
Alain BlumGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France.
Pedro Augusto Gondim TeixeiraGuilloz Imaging Department, Central Hospital, University Hospital Center of Nancy, 54000, Nancy, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHigh-resolution CT (HR-CT) cannot image trabecular bone due to insufficient spatial resolution. Ultra-high-resolution CT may be a valuable alternative. We aimed to describe the accuracy of Canon Medical HR, super-high-resolution (SHR), and ultra-high-resolution (UHR)-CT in measuring trabecular bone microarchitectural parameters using micro-CT as a reference. MATERIAL AND

methodsSixteen cadaveric distal tibial epiphyses were enrolled in this pre-clinical study. Images were acquired with HR-CT (i.e., 0.5 mm slice thickness/512

resultsTrabecular thickness was closest with UHR-CT but remained 1.37 times that of micro-CT (P < 0.001). With SHR-CT without and with DLR, it was 1.75 and 1.79 times that of micro-CT, respectively (P < 0.001), and 3.58 and 3.68 times that of micro-CT with HR-CT without and with DLR, respectively (P < 0.001). Trabecular separation was 0.7 times that of micro-CT with UHR-CT (P < 0.001), 0.93 and 0.94 times that of micro-CT with SHR-CT without and with DLR (P = 0.36 and 0.79, respectively), and 1.52 and 1.36 times that of micro-CT with HR-CT without and with DLR (P < 0.001). Bone volume/total volume was overestimated (i.e., 1.66 to 1.92 times that of micro-CT) by all techniques (P < 0.001). However, HR-CT values were superior to UHR-CT values (P = 0.03 and 0.01, without and with DLR, respectively).

conclusionUHR and SHR-CT were the closest techniques to micro-CT and surpassed HR-CT.

Indexed as

Cancellous BoneTibiaTomography, X-Ray ComputedX-Ray MicrotomographyCadaverDeep LearningFemaleHumansMaleRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedComputed tomographyDeep learning reconstructionOsteoporosisSpatial resolutionUltra-high resolution

Identifiers

PMID40738977

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.