Radiologic Evaluation of Chronic Vertebral Compression Fractures and Role of Vertebral Augmentation

Differentiation of acute and chronic vertebral compression fractures using conventional CT based on deep transfer learning features and hand-crafted radiomics features

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of deep learning radiomics (DLR) and hand-crafted radiomics (HCR) features in differentiating acute and chronic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).

METHODS

A total of 365 patients with VCFs were retrospectively analysed based on their computed tomography (CT) scan data. All patients completed MRI examination within 2 weeks. There were 315 acute VCFs and 205 chronic VCFs. Deep transfer learning (DTL) features and HCR features were extracted from CT images of patients with VCFs using DLR and traditional radiomics, respectively, and feature fusion was performed to establish the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. The MRI display of vertebral bone marrow oedema was used as the gold standard for acute VCF, and the model performance was evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC).To separately evaluate the effectiveness of DLR, traditional radiomics and feature fusion in the differential diagnosis of acute and chronic VCFs, we constructed a nomogram based on the clinical baseline data to visualize the classification evaluation. The predictive power of each model was compared using the Delong test, and the clinical value of the nomogram was evaluated using decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

Fifty DTL features were obtained from DLR, 41 HCR features were obtained from traditional radiomics, and 77 features fusion were obtained after feature screening and fusion of the two. The area under the curve (AUC) of the DLR model in the training cohort and test cohort were 0.992 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.983-0.999) and 0.871 (95% CI, 0.805-0.938), respectively. While the AUCs of the conventional radiomics model in the training cohort and test cohort were 0.973 (95% CI, 0.955-0.990) and 0.854 (95% CI, 0.773-0.934), respectively. The AUCs of the features fusion model in the training cohort and test cohort were 0.997 (95% CI, 0.994-0.999) and 0.915 (95% CI, 0.855-0.974), respectively. The AUCs of nomogram constructed by the features fusion in combination with clinical baseline data were 0.998 (95% CI, 0.996-0.999) and 0.946 (95% CI, 0.906-0.987) in the training cohort and test cohort, respectively. The Delong test showed that the differences between the features fusion model and the nomogram in the training cohort and the test cohort were not statistically significant (P values were 0.794 and 0.668, respectively), and the differences in the other prediction models in the training cohort and the test cohort were statistically significant (P < 0.05). DCA showed that the nomogram had high clinical value.

CONCLUSION

The features fusion model can be used for the differential diagnosis of acute and chronic VCFs, and its differential diagnosis ability is improved when compared with that when either radiomics is used alone. At the same time, the nomogram has a high predictive value for acute and chronic VCFs and can be a potential decision-making tool to assist clinicians, especially when a patient is unable to undergo spinal MRI examination.

Osteoporotic vertebral fractures: radiologic diagnosis, clinical and radiologic factors affecting surgical decision making: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations

With the varied literature on osteoporotic vertebral fracture that may predispose to diagnostic and management dilemma, it is timely to evaluate and streamline the evidence. The aim of this review is to create recommendations on osteoporotic vertebral fractures regarding radiologic diagnosis, and clinical and radiological factors affecting surgical decision making. A computerized literature search was done using PubMed, Google scholar and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2010 to 2020. For radiologic diagnosis, the keywords "osteoporotic vertebral fractures" and "radiologic diagnosis" were used yielding 394 articles (19 relevant articles). For clinical and radiological factors affecting surgical decision making, the keywords "osteoporotic vertebral fractures", "radiologic diagnosis", and "surgery" were used yielding 568 articles (25 relevant articles). All pertinent data were reviewed, and consensus statements were obtained in two virtual separate consensus meetings of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) Spine committee. The statements were voted and yielded positive or negative consensus using the Delphi method. This review summarizes the WFNS Spine Committee recommendations on the radiologic diagnosis, and clinical and radiological factors affecting surgical decision making of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

Is Kummell's Disease a Misdiagnosed and/or an Underreported Complication of Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures? A Pattern of the Condition and Available Treatment Modalities

This narrative review provides the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and describes the available conservative treatment options for patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) that have risk factors for Kummell's disease (KD). It aims to explore the evidence, emphasize the possible therapy complications, and aims to propose the most efficient clinical strategies for maintaining a good overall condition of individuals who may suffer from neurological deficits from a late-diagnosed OVCF complication. The secondary objective is to sum up the diagnostic particularities concerning individuals prone to OVCFs and KD, as the major risk factor for developing these severe conditions remains osteoporosis. Findings of our narrative review are based on the results found in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar from the beginning of their inception to December 2020, described independently by two authors. All of the studies included in the review focus on reporting the following treatment methods: conservative methods, vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, targeted percutaneous vertebroplasty, frontal and side-opening cannula vertebroplasty, SpineJack, bone-feeling mesh container treatment, and the difference in the cement viscosity used (high vs. low) and the approach used (unilateral vs. bilateral). The comparison of randomized control trials (RCTs) as well as prospective and retrospective case series showed a comparable efficacy of kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty, and described cement-augmented screw fixation and the SpineJack system as effective and safe. Although it should be noted that several studies revealed inconsistent results in regards to the efficacy of using back braces and analgesics in patients who had vertebral fractures that were overlooked or not enrolled in any active surveillance program to track the patient's deterioration immediately. Nevertheless there are non-standardized guidelines for treating patients with OVCFs and their complications already established. Using these guidelines, a treatment plan can be planned that takes into consideration the patients' comorbidities and susceptibilities. However, the primary approach remains the management of osteoporosis and that is why prophylaxis and prevention play a crucial role. These measures reduce the risk of disease progression. Unfortunately, in the majority of cases these measures are not taken into account and KD develops.