Abstract
Objective
To explore the characteristics of vertebral CT Hounsfield units (HU) in elderly patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures.
Methods
A total of 299 patients aged ≥ 65 years with acute vertebral fragility fractures were retrospectively reviewed, and 77 patients of them were age- and sex-matched with 77 control patients without any fractures. The vertebral HU value of L1(L1-HU) was measured, and T12 and L2 were used as alternatives for L1 in the case of L1 fracture.
Results
There were 460 thoracic and lumbar vertebral fractures in the 299 elderly patients, including 349 acute vertebral fragility fractures and 111 chronic fractures. The average L1-HU value was 66.0 ± 30.6 HU and showed significant difference among patients having different numbers of vertebral fractures (one fracture: 73.3 ± 27.0 HU, two fractures: 58.7 ± 32.5 HU, three or more fractures: 40.7 ± 28.8 HU; P < 0.001). As for the 1:1 age- and sex-matched patients, the L1-HU of the 77 patients with fractures was lower than that of the control patients (70.6 ± 23.4 HU vs. 101.5 ± 36.2 HU, P < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of using L1-HU to differentiate patients with fractures from controls was 0.77(95% CI 0.70–0.85, P < 0.001). The cutoff value had high specificity of 90% or high sensitivity of 90% to identify patients with fractures of 60 HU and 100 HU, respectively.
Conclusions
The elderly patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures have much lower HU values than those without fractures. Moreover, the lower the vertebral HU value is, the more likely the patients have more than one vertebral fracture.
Graphic abstract
These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Zhang ZQ, Ho SC, Chen ZQ, Zhang CX, Chen YM (2014) Reference values of bone mineral density and prevalence of osteoporosis in Chinese adults. Osteoporos Int 25:497–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-013-2418-2
Wright NC, Saag KG, Dawson-Hughes B, Khosla S, Siris ES (2017) The impact of the new National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA) diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of osteoporosis in the USA. Osteoporos Int 28:1225–1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3865-3
Johannesdottir F, Allaire B, Bouxsein ML (2018) Fracture prediction by computed tomography and finite element analysis: current and future perspectives. Curr Osteoporos Rep 16:411–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11914-018-0450-z
Yu F, Xia W (2019) The epidemiology of osteoporosis, associated fragility fractures, and management gap in China. Arch Osteoporos 14:32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-018-0549-y
Muraki S, Yamamoto S, Ishibashi H, Horiuchi T, Hosoi T, Orimo H, Nakamura K (2004) Impact of degenerative spinal diseases on bone mineral density of the lumbar spine in elderly women. Osteoporos Int 15:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-004-1600-y
Engelke K, Lang T, Khosla S, Qin L, Zysset P, Leslie WD, Shepherd JA, Shousboe JT (2015) Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography-based advanced techniques in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2015 ISCD official positions-part III. J Clin Densitom 18:393–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2015.06.010
Lee SJ, Graffy PM, Zea RD, Ziemlewicz TJ, Pickhardt PJ (2018) Future osteoporotic fracture risk related to lumbar vertebral trabecular attenuation measured at routine body CT. J Bone Miner Res 33:860–867
Wagner SC, Formby PM, Helgeson MD, Kang DG (2016) Diagnosing the undiagnosed. Spine 41:E1279–E1283. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001612
Pickhardt PJ, Pooler BD, Lauder T, del Rio AM, Bruce RJ, Binkley N (2013) Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using abdominal computed tomography scans obtained for other indications. Ann Intern Med 158:588–595. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00003
Lee SJ, Binkley N, Lubner MG, Bruce RJ, Ziemlewicz TJ, Pickhardt PJ (2015) Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis using the sagittal reconstruction from routine abdominal CT for combined assessment of vertebral fractures and density. Osteoporos Int 27:1131–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3318-4
Hendrickson NR, Pickhardt PJ, Del Rio AM, Rosas HG, Anderson PA (2018) Bone mineral density T-scores derived from CT attenuation numbers (Hounsfield units): clinical utility and correlation with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Iowa Orthop J 38:25–31
Anderson PA, Polly DW, Binkley NC, Pickhardt PJ (2018) Clinical use of opportunistic computed tomography screening for osteoporosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 100:2073–2081. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.01376
Zou D, Li W, Deng C, Du G, Xu N (2019) The use of CT Hounsfield unit values to identify the undiagnosed spinal osteoporosis in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. Eur Spine J 28(8):1758–1766
Graffy PM, Lee SJ, Ziemlewicz TJ, Pickhardt PJ (2017) Prevalence of vertebral compression fractures on routine CT scans according to L1 trabecular attenuation: determining relevant thresholds for opportunistic osteoporosis screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209:491–496. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.17853
Genant HK, Wu CY, van Kuijk C, Nevitt MC (1993) Vertebral fracture assessment using a semiquantitative technique. J Bone Miner Res 8:1137–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbmr.5650080915
Lee SJ, Anderson PA, Pickhardt PJ (2017) Predicting future hip fractures on routine abdominal CT using opportunistic osteoporosis screening measures: a matched case–control study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209:395–402. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.17820
Pompe E, de Jong PA, de Jong WU, Takx RAP, Eikendal ALM, Willemink MJ, Oudkerk M, Budde RPJ, Lammers J-WJ, Hoesein FAAM (2016) Inter-observer and inter-examination variability of manual vertebral bone attenuation measurements on computed tomography. Eur Radiol 26:3046–3053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4145-x
Schreiber JJ, Anderson PA, Rosas HG, Buchholz AL, Au AG (2011) Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(11):1057–1063
Alacreu E, Moratal D, Arana E (2017) Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis by routine CT in Southern Europe. Osteoporos Int 28:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-016-3804-3
Pickhardt PJ, Lauder T, Pooler BD, Muñoz del Rio A, Rosas H, Bruce RJ, Binkley N (2015) Effect of IV contrast on lumbar trabecular attenuation at routine abdominal CT: correlation with DXA and implications for opportunistic osteoporosis screening. Osteoporos Int 27:147–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3224-9
Emohare O, Cagan A, Morgan R, Davis R, Asis M, Switzer J, Polly DW Jr (2014) The use of computed tomography attenuation to evaluate osteoporosis following acute fractures of the thoracic and lumbar vertebra. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 5(2):50–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458514525042
Pompe E, Bartstra J, Verhaar HJ, de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, Oudkerk M, Vliegenthart R, Lammers JJ, de Jong PA, Mohamed Hoesein FAA (2017) Bone density loss on computed tomography at 3-year follow-up in current compared to former male smokers. Eur J Radiol 89:177–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.02.011
Funding
No funding was received.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None of the authors has any conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethical approval
All data collection and analysis conducted in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zou, D., Ye, K., Tian, Y. et al. Characteristics of vertebral CT Hounsfield units in elderly patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures. Eur Spine J 29, 1092–1097 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06363-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06363-1