Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40935874›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Opportunistic osteoporosis assessment from routine CT-effect of intravenous contrast agents on absolute values, T-scores, and derived classifications in single- and dual-energy CT.

Jennifer Gotta, Vitali Koch, Scherwin Mahmoudi, Simon S Martin, Jan Erik Scholtz, Christian Booz, Katrin Eichler, Simon Bernatz, Philipp Reschke, Tatjana Gruber-Rouh and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Jennifer GottaDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. jennifergotta@aol.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0524-6574
Vitali KochDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Scherwin MahmoudiDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Simon S MartinDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Jan Erik ScholtzDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Christian BoozDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Katrin EichlerDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Simon BernatzDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Philipp ReschkeDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Tatjana Gruber-RouhDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Tommaso D'AngeloDepartment of Biomedical Sciences and Morphological and Functional Imaging, University Hospital Messina, Messina, Italy.
Thomas J VoglDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Leon D GruenewaldDepartment of Radiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesComputed tomography (CT) is widely used for bone health assessment, impacting osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment. However, the influence of intravenous contrast agents on CT-based bone mineral density (BMD) measurements remains debated. This study evaluates the effect of contrast agents on Hounsfield measurements, T-scores, and Z-scores, assessing their impact on diagnostic accuracy to reduce misclassification and optimize CT-based BMD assessment. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective analysis of 597 patients (median age: 66 years, 157 females, 440 males) was performed using dual-energy CT (DECT) scans of the abdomen and chest. All patients underwent non-contrast, arterial, and venous phase CT. Automated segmentation (nnU-Net) delineated L1 and L1-L4 trabecular bone, validated by two radiologists. T-scores were calculated according to DEXA-equivalent guidelines.

resultsBased on non-contrast CT, 35% were diagnosed with osteoporosis, 46% with osteopenia, and 18% had normal bone status. Median T-score was -2.0 (L1) and -2.1 (L1-L4) (p < 0.001). Contrast agents significantly altered BMD values, with median changes of 22.9% (arterial) and 20.1% (venous). The most pronounced changes occurred in patients under 50 years (+99% at L1, p < 0.001). In older females, 21% were misclassified as osteopenic instead of osteoporotic (p < 0.001).

conclusionsContrast agents significantly affect BMD measurements, leading to diagnostic misclassification. This effect should be considered when using CT for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment planning. KEY POINTS: Question Standard CT scans with contrast media may distort bone density measurements, potentially leading to misdiagnosis of osteoporosis and inappropriate clinical decisions. Findings Contrast-enhanced CT scans significantly alter T- and Z-scores, leading to diagnostic shifts in over 50% of patients, especially women over 50. Clinical relevance Our findings highlight the risk of osteoporosis misclassification due to contrast agents in CT imaging, underscoring the need for adjusted interpretation protocols to ensure accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment, particularly in older adults and female patients.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaOsteoporosisTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBone DensityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiography, Dual-Energy Scanned ProjectionRetrospective StudiesContrast MediaBody compositionComputed tomographyContrast mediaOsteoporosisTrabecular bone

Identifiers

PMID40935874
PMCPMC12963074

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.