ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Feasibility study in quantitative identification of fresh and old osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture by vertebral CT value and CT value difference.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic value of an S1-normalized CT hounsfield unit ratio for identifying acute fractures in complex thoracolumbar osteoporotic deformities.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
- Diagnosis of Acute Versus Chronic Thoracolumbar Vertebral Compression Fractures Using CT Radiomics Based on Machine Learning: a Preliminary Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2025Article
- Osteoporosis Assessment Using Bone Density Measurement in Hounsfield Units in the Femoral Native CT Cross-Section: A Comparison with Computed Tomography X-Ray Absorptiometry of the Hip.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to assess the diagnostic utility of vertebral CT value and CT value difference in distinguishing between fresh and old osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 118 patients with OVCF who underwent both MRI and CT examinations at our hospital. The nature of the fractured vertebra was determined according to MRI. The CT value of the fractured vertebrae and the mean CT value of the adjacent normal vertebrae were measured separately, and the differences between these values were calculated. Independent samples t-tests were used to compare CT value and CT value difference among all groups. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was employed to determine the optimal cut-off value for both CT value and CT value difference in differentiating fresh and old fractures.
resultsThe study included a total of 163 fractured vertebrae from 118 patients. The CT value of fresh fractured vertebrae was significantly higher than those of adjacent normal vertebrae, which was statistically different (P < 0.001). In contrast, the difference between CT value of old fractured vertebrae and those of adjacent normal vertebrae was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in CT value and CT value difference between fresh fractured vertebrae and old fractured vertebrae (P < 0.001). The ROC curve analysis showed that the optimal cut-off value of CT value for fresh fractures and old fractures was 103.40 HU. The optimal cut-off value of CT value difference was 39.81 HU.
conclusionVertebral CT value and CT value difference offer a certain reference value for distinguishing between fresh and old OVCF. These parameters can serve as a rapid diagnostic tool when MRI is unavailable or impractical, aiding in the timely assessment of OVCF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.