ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
The HBA-3 score: a simple bedside tool to predict cage subsidence after TLIF.
Article in 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. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCage subsidence is a common radiographic finding following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), but its clinical relevance remains uncertain. Hounsfield Unit (HU) values from preoperative CT scans have emerged as surrogates for local bone quality, yet few studies have validated simple, clinically applicable prediction models or examined the relationship between subsidence and functional outcomes.
methodsRetrospective analysis of 76 patients who underwent single-level TLIF (2019-2023) with preoperative CT imaging and 12-month follow-up. HU was measured at the fused vertebral bodies. Cage subsidence was defined as ≥ 2 mm vertical migration or disc height loss on CT at 6-12 months. Logistic regression, Random Forest, and XGBoost models were applied to identify key predictors. A three-point bedside score (HBA-3) was derived using ROC/Youden thresholds for HU (< 131), BMI (> 30), and age (≥ 60). Outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D VAS, and patient satisfaction.
resultsThe overall subsidence rate was 31.6% (24/76). HU, BMI, and age consistently emerged as the strongest predictors across all models, while sex, smoking, alcohol, and cage type contributed minimal signal. The HBA-3 score stratified subsidence risk stepwise from 12.5% (0 points) to 50.0% (3 points), with good discrimination (cross-validated AUC = 0.73; logistic 0.70, RF 0.73, XGBoost 0.72). Inter-rater reliability of HU was excellent (ICC = 0.98). Despite these radiographic findings, subsidence was not associated with worse PROMs at 12 months (satisfaction p = 0.29; ODI p = 0.66; EQ-5D VAS p = 0.87). Higher HBA-3 scores were not associated with ODI at 12 months (p = 0.45) or ODI MCID attainment (p = 0.25). ODI improved significantly at 12 months (- 12.0, p < 0.0001), while EQ-5D showed no significant change.
conclusionThe HBA-3 score (HU, BMI, age) provides a simple, reproducible tool for estimating subsidence risk after TLIF, with stepwise increases in risk across strata. However, radiographic subsidence did not predict functional recovery in this single-level degenerative cohort, underscoring the need to distinguish between radiographic and patient-centred outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41945135What 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.