Level-Specific Volumetric BMD Threshold Values for the Prediction of Incident Vertebral Fractures Using Opportunistic QCT: A Case-Control Study

Abstract

PurposeTo establish and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) threshold values at different spinal levels, derived from opportunistic quantitative computed tomography (QCT), for the prediction of incident vertebral fractures (VF).Materials and MethodsIn this case-control study, 35 incident VF cases (23 women, 12 men; mean age: 67 years) and 70 sex- and age-matched controls were included, based on routine multi detector CT (MDCT) scans of the thoracolumbar spine. Trabecular vBMD was measured from routine baseline CT scans of the thoracolumbar spine using an automated pipeline including vertebral segmentation, asynchronous calibration for HU-to-vBMD conversion, and correction of intravenous contrast medium (https://anduin.bonescreen.de). Threshold values at T1-L5 were calculated for the optimal operating point according to the Youden index and for fixed sensitivities (60 – 85%) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.ResultsvBMD at each single level of the thoracolumbar spine was significantly associated with incident VFs (odds ratio per SD decrease [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] at T1-T4: 3.28, 1.66–6.49; at T5-T8: 3.28, 1.72–6.26; at T9-T12: 3.37, 1.78–6.36; and at L1-L4: 3.98, 1.97–8.06), independent of adjustment for age, sex, and prevalent VF. AUC showed no significant difference between vertebral levels and was highest at the thoracolumbar junction (AUC = 0.75, 95%-CI = 0.63 - 0.85 for T11-L2). Optimal threshold values increased from lumbar (L1-L4: 52.0 mg/cm³) to upper thoracic spine (T1-T4: 69.3 mg/cm³). At T11-L2, T12-L3 and L1-L4, a threshold of 80.0 mg/cm³ showed sensitivities of 85 - 88%, and specificities of 41 - 49%. To achieve comparable sensitivity (85%) at more superior spinal levels, resulting thresholds were higher: 114.1 mg/cm³ (T1-T4), 92.0 mg/cm³ (T5-T8), 88.2 mg/cm³ (T9-T12).ConclusionsAt all levels of the thoracolumbar spine, lower vBMD was associated with incident VFs in an elderly, predominantly oncologic patient population. Automated opportunistic osteoporosis screening of vBMD along the entire thoracolumbar spine allows for risk assessment of imminent VFs. We propose level-specific vBMD threshold at the thoracolumbar spine to identify individuals at high fracture risk.

The role of sarcopenia in fragility fractures of the pelvis – is sarcopenia an underestimated risk factor?

“…When the L3 vertebra could not be used due to fractures, hemangioma or other issues, the next lower possible vertebra was used for measurements. HU were than transformed to bone mineral density (BMD) by asynchronous calibration based on scanner specific equations [ 23 ]. We then used the cut-off values proposed by the American College of Radiology to define osteoporosis (BMD < 80.0 mg/cm 3 ) and osteopenia ≥ 80.0 to < 120.0 mg/cm 3 ) [ 24 ].…”

Opportunistic Computed Tomography Screening for Osteoporosis and Fracture

“…23 They found that automated opportunistic osteoporosis screening of vBMD along the entire thoracolumbar spine allows for risk assessment of imminent vertebral fracture and proposed a level-specific vBMD threshold at the thoracolumbar spine to identify individuals at high fracture risk. 23…”

“…23 They found that automated opportunistic osteoporosis screening of vBMD along the entire thoracolumbar spine allows for risk assessment of imminent vertebral fracture and proposed a level-specific vBMD threshold at the thoracolumbar spine to identify individuals at high fracture risk. 23 Internal calibration, also called patient-specific phantomless calibration, uses the patient's own internal tissues as a calibrating reference material. 24 Internal density calibration uses in-scan ROIs to determine a voxel-specific density calibration.…”

Computer Vision in Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture Risk Prediction: A Systematic Review

“…Segmentation is not necessary in an automated pipeline. Adapted from Dieckmeyer et al [ 47 ] and Ibrahim et al [ 48 ].…”