Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2012 Apr;27(4):808-16.
doi: 10.1002/jbmr.1539.

Prediction of new clinical vertebral fractures in elderly men using finite element analysis of CT scans

Collaborators, Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Prediction of new clinical vertebral fractures in elderly men using finite element analysis of CT scans

Xiang Wang et al. J Bone Miner Res. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Vertebral strength, as estimated by finite element analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans, has not yet been compared against areal bone mineral density (BMD) by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for prospectively assessing the risk of new clinical vertebral fractures. To do so, we conducted a case-cohort analysis of 306 men aged 65 years and older, which included 63 men who developed new clinically-identified vertebral fractures and 243 men who did not, all observed over an average of 6.5 years. Nonlinear finite element analysis was performed on the baseline CT scans, blinded to fracture status, to estimate L1 vertebral compressive strength and a load-to-strength ratio. Volumetric BMD by quantitative CT and areal BMD by DXA were also evaluated. We found that, for the risk of new clinical vertebral fracture, the age-adjusted hazard ratio per standard deviation change for areal BMD (3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-5.2) was significantly lower (p < 0.005) than for strength (7.2; 95% CI, 3.6-14.1), numerically lower than for volumetric BMD (5.7; 95% CI, 3.1-10.3), and similar for the load-to-strength ratio (3.0; 95% CI, 2.1-4.3). After also adjusting for race, body mass index (BMI), clinical center, and areal BMD, all these hazard ratios remained highly statistically significant, particularly those for strength (8.5; 95% CI, 3.6-20.1) and volumetric BMD (9.4; 95% CI, 4.1-21.6). The area-under-the-curve for areal BMD (AUC = 0.76) was significantly lower than for strength (AUC = 0.83, p = 0.02), volumetric BMD (AUC = 0.82, p = 0.05), and the load-to-strength ratio (AUC = 0.82, p = 0.05). We conclude that, compared to areal BMD by DXA, vertebral compressive strength and volumetric BMD consistently improved vertebral fracture risk assessment in this cohort of elderly men.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DISCLOSURES

The funding agencies had no role in the design and conduct of the study, in the collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data, or in the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. Dr. Keaveny has a financial interest in O.N. Diagnostics and both he and the company may benefit from the results of this work. All other authors state that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Vertebral strength, load-to-strength ratio, volumetric BMD, and the ratio of vertebral strength to volumetric BMD, all plotted against total lumbar spine areal BMD (by DXA). Fracture cases are shown in solid red (n=63), no-fracture cases are shown in open black (n=243). Total lumbar spine areal BMD values of 0.82 and 0.98 g/cm2 correspond to T-scores of −2.5 and −1.0, respectively, using young male reference values.
Figure A1
Figure A1
Validation of the BCT-derived compressive strength estimates against experimental measurements from biomechanical testing. Data are for 52 isolated individual vertebral body specimens (T7–L4) taken from 52 cadavers. Least squares regression analysis indicated that the slope was not significantly different than zero (95% confidence intervals of 0.97–1.23) and the intercept was not different than zero (p=0.78).

References

    1. Black DM, Arden NK, Palermo L, Pearson J, Cummings SR. Prevalent vertebral deformities predict hip fractures and new vertebral deformities but not wrist fractures. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. J Bone Miner Res. 1999;14:821–828. - PubMed
    1. Cummings SR, Bates D, Black DM. Clinical use of bone densitometry - Scientific review. J Am Med Assoc. 2002;288:1889–1897. - PubMed
    1. Schuit SC, van der Klift M, Weel AE, de Laet CE, Burger H, Seeman E, Hofman A, Uitterlinden AG, van Leeuwen JP, Pols HA. Fracture incidence and association with bone mineral density in elderly men and women: the Rotterdam Study. Bone. 2004;34:195–202. - PubMed
    1. Siris ES, Chen YT, Abbott TA, Barrett-Connor E, Miller PD, Wehren LE, Berger ML. Bone mineral density thresholds for pharmacological intervention to prevent fractures. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1108–1112. - PubMed
    1. Liebschner MA, Kopperdahl DL, Rosenberg WS, Keaveny TM. Finite element modeling of the human thoracolumbar spine. Spine. 2003;28:559–565. - PubMed

Publication types