ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Role of vertebral fat fraction and R2* based on fat analysis and calculation technique in the quantitative assessment of osteoporosis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting intraoperative blood loss using cervical vertebral bone quality scores in cervical corpectomy and fusion procedure.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
- Evaluation of the severity of lumbar osteoporosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using q-Dixon magnetic resonance imaging.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the diagnostic efficacy of vertebral fat fraction (FF) and R2* derived from the Fat Analysis and Calculation Technique (FACT) for Osteoporosis (OP) and explore their associations with clinical parameters.
methodsA total of 123 patients with low back pain (59.1 ± 15.1 years, 41males) underwent lumbar FACT magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) within 48 h. FF, R2*, BMD, T-scores, and Z-scores were measured at L1-L4 vertebrae. Based on WHO criteria (T-score), subjects were categorized into normal (T ≥ - 1), osteopenia (- 2.5 < T < - 1), and OP (T ≤ - 2.5) groups. Statistical analyses included ANOVA, Pearson/Spearman correlations, and ROC curve analysis.
resultsThe OP group exhibited significantly higher FF values compared to the normal group (overall: 59.8% vs. 47.7%, P < 0.001), with a more pronounced increase in females (between-group FF difference: F = 23.5 vs. males F = 4.6). R2* decreased progressively with bone loss (overall: 134.2 Hz vs. 162.0 Hz in normal group, P = 0.001). FF showed a strong positive correlation with age (overall: r = 0.66, P < 0.001) and negative correlations with BMD and T-scores (overall: r = - 0.42 and - 0.45, P < 0.001). R2* was negatively correlated with age (overall: r = - 0.48, P < 0.001), particularly in males (r = - 0.61 vs. females r = - 0.36). The multi-parameter model demonstrated superior diagnostic performance for osteopenia (AUC = 0.794, 95%CI: 0.699-0.866) and OP (AUC = 0.893, 95%CI: 0.814-0.947), outperforming single parameters.
conclusionFACT technology quantifies age and sex specific patterns of marrow FF and R2* during osteoporosis progression. The multi-parameter model significantly enhances diagnostic accuracy, providing a comprehensive imaging-metabolic biomarker for individualized OP assessment.
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.