Scholarlink

Objective <p>To assess the discriminatory ability of vertebra-specific volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), finite element analysis-derived fracture load (FEA-derived FL), and texture analysis (TA) features for incidental vertebral fractures, and to compare performance between thoracic and lumbar levels.</p> Materials and methods <p>We retrospectively reviewed baseline and follow-up thoracolumbar CT scans from 420 patients and identified 11 patients with incidental vertebral fractures contributing to 20 fractured vertebrae (7 females; mean age 65.5years). For each fractured vertebra, three level-matched control vertebrae from patients without fractures were selected, yielding 58 controls across 29 control patients (total 78 vertebrae). Parameters evaluated include vBMD, FEA-derived FL, and TA features (24 total). Discriminatory ability was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) values.</p> Results <p>vBMD, FEA-derived FL, and 4 of 24 TA features showed group-wise differences between fractured and control vertebrae groups. AUCs were 0.76 [95% CI 0.55–0.90] (vBMD) and 0.73 [95% CI 0.52–0.90] (FEA-derived FL); selected texture features ranged 0.70–0.72. Region-stratified AUC point estimates were higher in the lumbar than in the thoracic vertebrae, but the 95% CIs were wide/overlapping; comparisons are descriptive.</p> Conclusion <p>vBMD had the numerically largest AUC point estimate for discriminating fractured from control vertebrae; FEA-derived FL was similar, and selected texture features showed modest discrimination with comparable point estimates across lumbar and thoracic levels, generating the hypothesis of less region dependence. Regional comparisons are descriptive. Findings are exploratory and intended to prioritize candidate measures for validation and future multivariable modeling before any clinical application.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Vertebral-level discrimination of incidental vertebral fractures using volumetric BMD, texture features, and finite element–derived fracture load: an exploratory study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月16日

查看全文
  • Daniel Strack,
  • Michael Dieckmeyer,
  • Nico Sollmann,
  • Thomas Baum,
  • Jan S. Kirschke,
  • Karupppasamy Subburaj

摘要

Objective

To assess the discriminatory ability of vertebra-specific volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD), finite element analysis-derived fracture load (FEA-derived FL), and texture analysis (TA) features for incidental vertebral fractures, and to compare performance between thoracic and lumbar levels.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed baseline and follow-up thoracolumbar CT scans from 420 patients and identified 11 patients with incidental vertebral fractures contributing to 20 fractured vertebrae (7 females; mean age 65.5years). For each fractured vertebra, three level-matched control vertebrae from patients without fractures were selected, yielding 58 controls across 29 control patients (total 78 vertebrae). Parameters evaluated include vBMD, FEA-derived FL, and TA features (24 total). Discriminatory ability was assessed using area under the curve (AUC) values.

Results

vBMD, FEA-derived FL, and 4 of 24 TA features showed group-wise differences between fractured and control vertebrae groups. AUCs were 0.76 [95% CI 0.55–0.90] (vBMD) and 0.73 [95% CI 0.52–0.90] (FEA-derived FL); selected texture features ranged 0.70–0.72. Region-stratified AUC point estimates were higher in the lumbar than in the thoracic vertebrae, but the 95% CIs were wide/overlapping; comparisons are descriptive.

Conclusion

vBMD had the numerically largest AUC point estimate for discriminating fractured from control vertebrae; FEA-derived FL was similar, and selected texture features showed modest discrimination with comparable point estimates across lumbar and thoracic levels, generating the hypothesis of less region dependence. Regional comparisons are descriptive. Findings are exploratory and intended to prioritize candidate measures for validation and future multivariable modeling before any clinical application.