An analysis of different modalities of bone mineral densitometry evaluation in cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 SURGERY Frontiers in Surgery Pub Date : 2024-12-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2024.1472080

Qingsong Yu, Jiabao Chen, Haidong Wang, Lei Ma

{"title":"An analysis of different modalities of bone mineral densitometry evaluation in cage subsidence in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.","authors":"Qingsong Yu, Jiabao Chen, Haidong Wang, Lei Ma","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1472080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the effectiveness of different measurement methods on bone miner density (BMD), including cervical HU of CT, MRI-based cervical vertebral bone quality (C-VBQ), and T value of DEXA, for predicting cage subsidence after single-level ACDF.Methods: This is a retrospective study, and patients who underwent single-level ACDF from June 2019 to June 2022 were recruited. We collected preoperative total segmental vertebral height (pre-TSVH), cage subsidence height, cervical angle (CA), T1-slope, straight or reverse cervical curvature, mean HU value of C3-7 (C-HU), mean HU of segment (seg-HU), C-VBQ, segmental C-VBQ (seg-VBQ), and total lumbar T value (T value). The variables between the two groups were compared by Student's t test or chi-square test. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent risk factors for subsidence. The ROC curve was used to analyze the predictive efficiency of C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ and T value for cage subsidence. Finally, the correlations of C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ, T value and subsidence height were analyzed.Results: A total of 320 patients were included in this study, and 97 patients (30.31%) had cage subsidence at the last follow-up. The subsidence height was 4.25 ± 0.937 mm in the subsidence group and 1.40 ± 0.726 mm in the nonsubsidence group. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in bone mineral density-related indexes, including C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ, and T value (p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that C-HU was an independent risk factor for vertebral subsidence after single-level ACDF. ROC curve analysis showed that C-HU had the largest AUC of 0.897 (0.862, 0.933) in predicting vertebral subsidence. Correlation analysis showed that C-HU had a high correlation with the T value (r = 0.662, p < 0.001), while C-VBQ had a low correlation with the T value (r = -0.173, p = 0.002), and C-VBQ had a low correlation with subsidence height (r = 0.135, p = 0.016).Conclusion: Our study showed that compared with the C-VBQ and T value, C-HU is more effective for predicting cage subsidence after ACDF. Using the segmental index of C-VBQ or HU could not improve predictive effectiveness. C-VBQ may be insufficient in predicting cage subsidence and estimating BMD.","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"11 ","pages":"1472080"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11666519/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1472080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of different measurement methods on bone miner density (BMD), including cervical HU of CT, MRI-based cervical vertebral bone quality (C-VBQ), and T value of DEXA, for predicting cage subsidence after single-level ACDF.

Methods: This is a retrospective study, and patients who underwent single-level ACDF from June 2019 to June 2022 were recruited. We collected preoperative total segmental vertebral height (pre-TSVH), cage subsidence height, cervical angle (CA), T1-slope, straight or reverse cervical curvature, mean HU value of C3-7 (C-HU), mean HU of segment (seg-HU), C-VBQ, segmental C-VBQ (seg-VBQ), and total lumbar T value (T value). The variables between the two groups were compared by Student's t test or chi-square test. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent risk factors for subsidence. The ROC curve was used to analyze the predictive efficiency of C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ and T value for cage subsidence. Finally, the correlations of C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ, T value and subsidence height were analyzed.

Results: A total of 320 patients were included in this study, and 97 patients (30.31%) had cage subsidence at the last follow-up. The subsidence height was 4.25 ± 0.937 mm in the subsidence group and 1.40 ± 0.726 mm in the nonsubsidence group. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in bone mineral density-related indexes, including C-HU, seg-HU, C-VBQ, seg-VBQ, and T value (p < 0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that C-HU was an independent risk factor for vertebral subsidence after single-level ACDF. ROC curve analysis showed that C-HU had the largest AUC of 0.897 (0.862, 0.933) in predicting vertebral subsidence. Correlation analysis showed that C-HU had a high correlation with the T value (r = 0.662, p < 0.001), while C-VBQ had a low correlation with the T value (r = -0.173, p = 0.002), and C-VBQ had a low correlation with subsidence height (r = 0.135, p = 0.016).

Conclusion: Our study showed that compared with the C-VBQ and T value, C-HU is more effective for predicting cage subsidence after ACDF. Using the segmental index of C-VBQ or HU could not improve predictive effectiveness. C-VBQ may be insufficient in predicting cage subsidence and estimating BMD.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Frontiers in Surgery Medicine-Surgery

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

11.10%

发文量

1872

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles. Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery. Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact. The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.