Measuring forearm bone density instead of lumbar spine bone density improves the sensitivity of diagnosing osteoporosis in older adults with cardiovascular diseases: Data from SARCOS study

Correlation between Forearm Bone Mineral Density Measured by Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry and Hounsfield Units Value Measured by CT in Lumbar Spine

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to determine if the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-measured forearm bone mineral density (BMD) correlates with the Hounsfield unit (HU) values obtained from computed tomography (CT).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 164 patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine was performed. DXA was used to measure the BMD and T-scores of each patient's forearm. Lumbar CT was used to measure the CT HU values in three axial images of the L1-L4 vertebral bodies, and the average was calculated. According to the preoperative DXA T-score, they were divided into a normal group, an osteopenia group, and an osteoporosis group. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to analyze the correlations of CT HU values in L1-L4 with BMD and T-scores in the corresponding vertebral body. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was used to determine the CT HU thresholds between osteoporosis and non-osteoporosis groups.

RESULTS

Forearm BMD was moderately correlated with L1-L4 CT HU values (0.4 < R2 < 0.6), and the correlation coefficients (R2) were 0.552, 0.578, 0.582, and 0.577, respectively (all p < 0.001). Forearm T-scores were moderately correlated with L1-L4 CT HU values (0.4 < R2 < 0.6), and the correlation coefficients (R2) were 0.595, 0.609, 0.605, and 0.605, respectively (all p < 0.001). The thresholds of L1-L4 between the osteoporosis group (t ≤ -2.5) and the non-osteoporosis group (t > -2.5) were 110.0 HU (sensitivity 74% and specificity 76%), 112.5 HU (sensitivity 67% and 83% specificity), 92.4 HU (81% sensitivity and 70% specificity), and 98.7 HU (74% sensitivity and 78% specificity), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the moderate positive correlation between forearm DXA-measured BMD and HU values, forearm DXA provides a theoretical basis for evaluating lumbar vertebral bone mass. Preoperative forearm DXA may be useful in the formulation of surgical plans and the prevention of postoperative complications in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases.

Opportunistic hand radiographs to screen for low forearm bone mineral density: a prospective and retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Low bone mineral density affects 53% of women over age 65 in the US, yet many are unaware and remain untreated. Underdiagnosis of forearm osteoporosis and related fragility fractures represent missed warning signs of more deadly, future fractures. This study aimed to determine if hand radiographs could serve as early, simple screening tools for predicting low forearm bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

We evaluated posterior-anterior (PA) hand radiographs (x-rays) and Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans of 43 participants. The ratio of the intramedullary cavity to total cortical diameter of the second metacarpal (second metacarpal cortical percentage (2MCP)) was used as a potential diagnostic marker. Mixed-effects linear regression was performed to determine correlation of 2MCP with BMD from various anatomic regions. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to compare BMD across sites. An optimal 2MCP cutoff for predicting forearm osteopenia and osteoporosis was found using Receiver Operating Curves.

RESULTS

2MCP is directly correlated with BMD in the forearm. The optimal 2MCP of 48.3% had 80% sensitivity for detecting osteoporosis of the 1/3 distal forearm. An 2MCP cutoff of 50.8% had 84% sensitivity to detect osteoporosis of the most distal forearm. Both 2MCP cutoffs were more sensitive at predicting forearm osteoporosis than femoral neck T-scores.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the expansion of osteoporosis screening to include low-cost hand x-rays, aiming to increase diagnosis and treatment of low forearm BMD and fractures. Proposed next steps include confirming the optimal 2MCP cutoff at scale and integrating automatic 2MCP measurements into PAC systems.

Forearm T-score as a predictor of cage subsidence in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease following posterior single-segment lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) has become a classic treatment modality for lumbar degenerative diseases, with cage subsidence as a potentially fatal complication due to low bone mineral density (BMD), which can be measured by forearm T-score. Hounsfield units (HU) derived from computed tomography have been a reliable method for assessing BMD.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accuracy of forearm T-score in predicting cage subsidence after PLIF compared with lumbar spine HU values.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 71 patients who underwent PLIF and divided them into cage subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The differences in preoperative HU value and forearm T-score were compared between groups, and the correlation between cage subsidence and clinical efficacy was analyzed.

RESULTS

The subsidence rate for all 71 patients (31 men and 40 women) was 23.9%. There was no significant difference in age, sex ratio, body mass index, smoking status, follow-up time, spine BMD, and spine T-score between groups, except in the forearm T-score and lumbar spine HU values (P < 0.05). The forearm T-score (AUC, 0.840; 95% CI, 0.672-1.000) predicted cage subsidence more accurately than the mean global HU value (AUC, 0.744; 95% CI, 0.544-0.943). In logistic regression analysis, both forearm T-score and mean global HU value were found to be independent risk factors for cage subsidence (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower forearm T-scores and lower lumbar spine HU values were significantly associated with the occurrence of cage subsidence. Lower forearm T-scores indicated a higher risk of cage subsidence than lumbar spine HU values. Forearm T-score is more effective in predicting cage subsidence than spine T-score. Therefore, forearm dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry may be a fast, simple, and reliable method for predicting cage subsidence following PLIF. However, our results suggest that the degree of cage subsidence is not associated with clinical efficacy.