Improving bone mineral density assessment in total shoulder arthroplasty: assessment of phantom-calibrated Hounsfield units in the glenoid and proximal humerus

IF 2 Q2 Medicine
JSES International Pub Date : 2026-07-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jseint.2026.101730
Saagar Dhanjani BA, Clarence Cabatu DO, Kishan S. Shah BS, Tim Wang MD, Darryl D. D'Lima MD, PhD, Heinz R. Hoenecke MD
{"title":"Improving bone mineral density assessment in total shoulder arthroplasty: assessment of phantom-calibrated Hounsfield units in the glenoid and proximal humerus","authors":"Saagar Dhanjani BA,&nbsp;Clarence Cabatu DO,&nbsp;Kishan S. Shah BS,&nbsp;Tim Wang MD,&nbsp;Darryl D. D'Lima MD, PhD,&nbsp;Heinz R. Hoenecke MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jseint.2026.101730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Bone mineral density (BMD) plays a critical role in the success of total shoulder arthroplasty, as poor bone quality is associated with poor implant fixation, particularly in short stem and stemless designs that rely on metaphyseal fixation. However, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans are not routinely obtained pre-operatively. Computed tomography–derived Hounsfield units (HUs) have emerged as a potential surrogate for BMD assessment, but HU values can have high variability, which limits accuracy. Phantom calibration may standardize HU values, but its benefit in the shoulder remains unclear. This study aimed to compare correlations of standard and phantom-calibrated (PC)-HU with DEXA-derived BMD, assess their diagnostic performance with receiver operating characteristic analysis, and identify HU thresholds for osteoporosis detection.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>A retrospective analysis was performed on 84 shoulders from 76 patients, with some patients contributing bilateral shoulders. All patients underwent both shoulder computed tomography and DEXA within 1 year of total shoulder arthroplasty. Demographics, clinical information, and behavioral factors were collected. HU values were measured from the glenoid and proximal humerus and were calibrated to mg/cc using a phantom. Correlations between HU and DEXA T-scores in the femoral neck, total hip, and spine were evaluated using Spearman correlation. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to identify optimal HU thresholds for osteoporosis classification.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Both standard and PC HU (mg/cc) values of the glenoid and proximal humerus significantly correlated with DEXA T-scores (<em>P</em> &lt; .001), though standard HU generally demonstrated stronger correlations. Optimal thresholds for identifying osteoporosis were 185.38 for the non-PC glenoid (sensitivity = 83.3%, specificity = 65.7%) and 30.90 for the proximal humerus (sensitivity = 78.6%, specificity = 75%). The PC glenoid threshold of 236.44 yielded slightly higher sensitivity (90.9%) but lower specificity (59.0%). PC proximal humerus HU did not demonstrate significant discriminatory power.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The optimal thresholds for identifying osteoporosis were 185.38 HU for the non-PC glenoid, 30.90 HU for the non-PC proximal humerus, and 236.44 mg/cc for the PC glenoid. Both standard and PC HU values of the glenoid and proximal humerus significantly correlated with DEXA T-scores, although standard HU generally showed stronger correlations. These findings suggest that phantom-based calibration at these sites may offer no additional benefit in assessing systemic BMD.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34444,"journal":{"name":"JSES International","volume":"10 4","pages":"Article 101730"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13311812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSES International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666638326001155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Bone mineral density (BMD) plays a critical role in the success of total shoulder arthroplasty, as poor bone quality is associated with poor implant fixation, particularly in short stem and stemless designs that rely on metaphyseal fixation. However, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans are not routinely obtained pre-operatively. Computed tomography–derived Hounsfield units (HUs) have emerged as a potential surrogate for BMD assessment, but HU values can have high variability, which limits accuracy. Phantom calibration may standardize HU values, but its benefit in the shoulder remains unclear. This study aimed to compare correlations of standard and phantom-calibrated (PC)-HU with DEXA-derived BMD, assess their diagnostic performance with receiver operating characteristic analysis, and identify HU thresholds for osteoporosis detection.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 84 shoulders from 76 patients, with some patients contributing bilateral shoulders. All patients underwent both shoulder computed tomography and DEXA within 1 year of total shoulder arthroplasty. Demographics, clinical information, and behavioral factors were collected. HU values were measured from the glenoid and proximal humerus and were calibrated to mg/cc using a phantom. Correlations between HU and DEXA T-scores in the femoral neck, total hip, and spine were evaluated using Spearman correlation. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to identify optimal HU thresholds for osteoporosis classification.

Results

Both standard and PC HU (mg/cc) values of the glenoid and proximal humerus significantly correlated with DEXA T-scores (P < .001), though standard HU generally demonstrated stronger correlations. Optimal thresholds for identifying osteoporosis were 185.38 for the non-PC glenoid (sensitivity = 83.3%, specificity = 65.7%) and 30.90 for the proximal humerus (sensitivity = 78.6%, specificity = 75%). The PC glenoid threshold of 236.44 yielded slightly higher sensitivity (90.9%) but lower specificity (59.0%). PC proximal humerus HU did not demonstrate significant discriminatory power.

Conclusion

The optimal thresholds for identifying osteoporosis were 185.38 HU for the non-PC glenoid, 30.90 HU for the non-PC proximal humerus, and 236.44 mg/cc for the PC glenoid. Both standard and PC HU values of the glenoid and proximal humerus significantly correlated with DEXA T-scores, although standard HU generally showed stronger correlations. These findings suggest that phantom-based calibration at these sites may offer no additional benefit in assessing systemic BMD.
改进全肩关节置换术中的骨矿物质密度评估:评估肩关节和肱骨近端幻影校准的Hounsfield单元。
背景:骨矿物质密度(BMD)在全肩关节置换术的成功中起着至关重要的作用,因为较差的骨质量与较差的假体固定有关,特别是在依赖干骺端固定的短柄和无柄设计中。然而,双能x线吸收仪(DEXA)扫描不是术前常规获得的。计算机断层扫描衍生的Hounsfield单位(HUs)已成为BMD评估的潜在替代品,但HU值可能具有很高的可变性,这限制了准确性。幻影校准可以使HU值标准化,但其在肩部的益处尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较标准和幻影校准(PC)-HU与dexa衍生BMD的相关性,通过受试者工作特征分析评估其诊断性能,并确定骨质疏松症检测的HU阈值。材料与方法:回顾性分析76例患者的84个肩部,部分患者双侧肩部病变。所有患者在全肩关节置换术后1年内均行肩关节ct和DEXA检查。收集了人口统计学、临床信息和行为因素。HU值从肩关节和肱骨近端测量,并使用假体校准到mg/cc。采用Spearman相关法评估股骨颈、全髋和脊柱的HU和DEXA t评分之间的相关性。采用受试者工作特征曲线分析确定骨质疏松症分类的最佳HU阈值。结果:肩关节和肱骨近端标准和PC HU (mg/cc)值与DEXA t -评分均显著相关(P < 0.001),但标准HU通常表现出更强的相关性。鉴别骨质疏松症的最佳阈值对于非pc关节盂为185.38(敏感性= 83.3%,特异性= 65.7%),对于肱骨近端为30.90(敏感性= 78.6%,特异性= 75%)。PC关节盂阈值236.44敏感性略高(90.9%),但特异性较低(59.0%)。PC肱骨近端HU未表现出明显的歧视性。结论:鉴别骨质疏松的最佳阈值为:非PC关节盂185.38 HU、非PC肱骨近端30.90 HU、PC关节盂236.44 mg/cc。肩关节和肱骨近端标准HU值和PC HU值与DEXA t评分均有显著相关性,尽管标准HU通常表现出更强的相关性。这些发现表明,在这些部位进行基于幻影的校准可能对评估全身骨密度没有额外的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JSES International
JSES International Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
174
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书