Fjola Johannesdottir1,2, Brett Allaire3, Mary L Bouxsein3,4,5. 1. Center for Advanced Orthopedic Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, RN 120, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. fjohanne@bidmc.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. fjohanne@bidmc.harvard.edu. 3. Center for Advanced Orthopedic Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, RN 120, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. 4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Endocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review critiques the ability of CT-based methods to predict incident hip and vertebral fractures. RECENT FINDINGS: CT-based techniques with concurrent calibration all show strong associations with incident hip and vertebral fracture, predicting hip and vertebral fractures as well as, and sometimes better than, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry areal biomass density (DXA aBMD). There is growing evidence for use of routine CT scans for bone health assessment. CT-based techniques provide a robust approach for osteoporosis diagnosis and fracture prediction. It remains to be seen if further technical advances will improve fracture prediction compared to DXA aBMD. Future work should include more standardization in CT analyses, establishment of treatment intervention thresholds, and more studies to determine whether routine CT scans can be efficiently used to expand the number of individuals who undergo evaluation for fracture risk.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review critiques the ability of CT-based methods to predict incident hip and vertebral fractures. RECENT FINDINGS: CT-based techniques with concurrent calibration all show strong associations with incident hip and vertebral fracture, predicting hip and vertebral fractures as well as, and sometimes better than, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry areal biomass density (DXA aBMD). There is growing evidence for use of routine CT scans for bone health assessment. CT-based techniques provide a robust approach for osteoporosis diagnosis and fracture prediction. It remains to be seen if further technical advances will improve fracture prediction compared to DXA aBMD. Future work should include more standardization in CT analyses, establishment of treatment intervention thresholds, and more studies to determine whether routine CT scans can be efficiently used to expand the number of individuals who undergo evaluation for fracture risk.
Entities:
Keywords:
Computational anatomy; Finite element analysis (FEA); Hip fracture; Opportunistic CT; Quantitative computed tomography (QCT); Vertebral fracture
Authors: J H Keyak; S Sigurdsson; G S Karlsdottir; D Oskarsdottir; A Sigmarsdottir; J Kornak; T B Harris; G Sigurdsson; B Y Jonsson; K Siggeirsdottir; G Eiriksdottir; V Gudnason; T F Lang Journal: Bone Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: S C E Schuit; M van der Klift; A E A M Weel; C E D H de Laet; H Burger; E Seeman; A Hofman; A G Uitterlinden; J P T M van Leeuwen; H A P Pols Journal: Bone Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Samuel Jang; Peter M Graffy; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Scott J Lee; Ronald M Summers; Perry J Pickhardt Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-03-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kristen M Beavers; Daniel P Beavers; Adolfo Z Fernandez; Katelyn A Greene; Ashlyn A Swafford; Ashley A Weaver; Sarah J Wherry; Jamy D Ard Journal: Clin Obes Date: 2021-09-27
Authors: Fernando U Kay; Vinh Ho; Edmund B Dosunmu; Avneesh Chhabra; Keenan Brown; Xinhui Duan; Orhan K Öz Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Veena Aggarwal; Christina Maslen; Richard L Abel; Pinaki Bhattacharya; Paul A Bromiley; Emma M Clark; Juliet E Compston; Nicola Crabtree; Jennifer S Gregory; Eleni P Kariki; Nicholas C Harvey; Kate A Ward; Kenneth E S Poole Journal: Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis Date: 2021-07-10 Impact factor: 5.346