Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis: validation study for L1 bone density measurements using contrast-enhanced chest and abdominal CTs.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Arnau Hanly, Soterios Gyftopoulos, Casey E Pelzl, Wei He, Connie Y Chang
{"title":"Opportunistic screening for osteoporosis: validation study for L1 bone density measurements using contrast-enhanced chest and abdominal CTs.","authors":"Arnau Hanly, Soterios Gyftopoulos, Casey E Pelzl, Wei He, Connie Y Chang","doi":"10.1007/s00256-025-04892-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To retrospectively validate the diagnostic power of attenuation values on chest and abdomen/pelvis CECTs, together and separately, compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-determined osteoporosis diagnoses, and to determine thresholds for accurate osteoporosis diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Subjects were identified using the electronic health record. Included patients received DEXA and CECT scans within 60 days of each other. Patients were excluded if taking osteoporosis medication, undergoing dialysis, receiving hormone or cancer therapy, had a history of cancer, osseous metastases, fractures, or compressions. Minimum, mean, and maximum CECT attenuation values of L1 trabecular bone axial cross-sections were measured by a non-physician in Hounsfield units (HUs) using an elliptical region of interest (ROI) tool. DEXA diagnoses were dichotomized as positive (osteoporosis) or negative (osteopenia/normal). The area under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (AUCs) were compared to identify ideal CECT attenuation thresholds.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred nineteen subjects (mean age 66 ± 0.6 [range 35-92]; 196 (89%) females and 23 (11%) males) were included for analysis. Thirty-one (14%) subjects were positive and 188 (86%) were negative for osteoporosis. Minimum, mean, and maximum combined chest and abdomen/pelvis attenuation values demonstrated AUCs of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67-0.84), 0.931 (95% CI 0.88-0.99), and 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.90). The optimal mean attenuation threshold for osteoporosis diagnosis was 120 HU (84% sensitive, 90% specific). There was no statistical difference in diagnostic power between mean attenuation values of chest and abdomen/pelvis CECTs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CECT mean attenuation values of either chest or abdomen/pelvis CECTs could be used as appropriate thresholds in screening for osteoporosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":21783,"journal":{"name":"Skeletal Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Skeletal Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-025-04892-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To retrospectively validate the diagnostic power of attenuation values on chest and abdomen/pelvis CECTs, together and separately, compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)-determined osteoporosis diagnoses, and to determine thresholds for accurate osteoporosis diagnosis.

Materials and methods: Subjects were identified using the electronic health record. Included patients received DEXA and CECT scans within 60 days of each other. Patients were excluded if taking osteoporosis medication, undergoing dialysis, receiving hormone or cancer therapy, had a history of cancer, osseous metastases, fractures, or compressions. Minimum, mean, and maximum CECT attenuation values of L1 trabecular bone axial cross-sections were measured by a non-physician in Hounsfield units (HUs) using an elliptical region of interest (ROI) tool. DEXA diagnoses were dichotomized as positive (osteoporosis) or negative (osteopenia/normal). The area under the receiver-operator characteristic curves (AUCs) were compared to identify ideal CECT attenuation thresholds.

Results: Two hundred nineteen subjects (mean age 66 ± 0.6 [range 35-92]; 196 (89%) females and 23 (11%) males) were included for analysis. Thirty-one (14%) subjects were positive and 188 (86%) were negative for osteoporosis. Minimum, mean, and maximum combined chest and abdomen/pelvis attenuation values demonstrated AUCs of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67-0.84), 0.931 (95% CI 0.88-0.99), and 0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.90). The optimal mean attenuation threshold for osteoporosis diagnosis was 120 HU (84% sensitive, 90% specific). There was no statistical difference in diagnostic power between mean attenuation values of chest and abdomen/pelvis CECTs.

Conclusion: CECT mean attenuation values of either chest or abdomen/pelvis CECTs could be used as appropriate thresholds in screening for osteoporosis.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Skeletal Radiology
Skeletal Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.50%
发文量
253
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Skeletal Radiology provides a forum for the dissemination of current knowledge and information dealing with disorders of the musculoskeletal system including the spine. While emphasizing the radiological aspects of the many varied skeletal abnormalities, the journal also adopts an interdisciplinary approach, reflecting the membership of the International Skeletal Society. Thus, the anatomical, pathological, physiological, clinical, metabolic and epidemiological aspects of the many entities affecting the skeleton receive appropriate consideration. This is the Journal of the International Skeletal Society and the Official Journal of the Society of Skeletal Radiology and the Australasian Musculoskelelal Imaging Group.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信