Alemán OLE, Ladewig BGI, Canales NJA, Hurtado PA, Abrego SAA

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 110-115
PDF size: 284.57 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: osteoporosis and associated bone disorders pose significant global health challenges. Traditional methods of assessing bone density, such as dual X-ray absorptiometry, have long been considered the gold standard in clinical practice. Material and methods: Hounsfield units were compared in computed tomography of the lumbar spine; averaging this number of the vertebral bodies from L1 to L5, ignoring the cortical surface in the bone window, axial section in the middle of the vertebral body with the T-score and Z-score in the hip and spine of 52 patients from the spine surgery outpatient clinic. Inclusion criteria: patient from the outpatient clinic at the Spine Clinic "Dr. Manuel Dufoo Olvera" of the Ministry of Health of Mexico City, patients over 18 years of age. Computed axial tomography of the lumbar spine visible during the consultation, bone densitometry of the lumbar spine, preserved cognitive function. Exclusion criteria: previous spinal procedures, neoplastic spinal pathology in the lumbar segment, infectious spinal pathology in the lumbar segment, vertebral destruction syndrome in the lumbar segment, cognitive deficit. Results: a statistically significant relationship was found between the number of Hounsfield units and bone densitometry, both for the young healthy patient (T-score) and adjusted for sex, race and age (Z-score). We had different average numbers with 179 Hounsfield units for normality, 114 for osteopneia and 79 for osteoporosis. Conclusion: it is important to know and treat osteoporosis before any spinal procedure due to the implications in complications and treatment that we may have. The present study shows a statistically significant relationship between Hounsfield units and bone densitometry to make the diagnosis of the previously mentioned disease, simplifying treatment algorithms, and reducing costs and time for our health system.

REFERENCES

1. Salari N, Ghasemi H, Mohammadi L, Behzadi MH, Rabieenia E, Shohaimi S, et al. The global prevalence of osteoporosis in the world: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021; 16: 609. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02772-0.

2. Lupsa BC, Insogna K. Bone health and osteoporosis. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2015; 44: 517-530. doi: 10.1016/j.ecl.2015.05.002.

3. Ameis A, Randhawa K, Yu H, Coté P, Haldeman S, Chou R, et al. The Global Spine Care Initiative: a review of reviews and recommendations for the non-invasive management of acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture pain in low- and middle-income communities. Eur Spine J. 2018; 27: 861-869. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5273-6.

4. Ahern DP, McDonnell JM, Riffault M, Evans S, Wagner SC, Vaccaro AR, et al. A meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of Hounsfield units on computed topography relative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in the spine surgery population. Spine J. 2021; 21: 1738-1749. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.008.

5. Imamudeen N, Basheer A, Iqbal AM, Manjila N, Haroon NN, Manjila S. Management of osteoporosis and spinal fractures: contemporary guidelines and evolving paradigms. Clin Med Res. 2022; 20: 95-106. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2021.1612.

6. Sardar ZM, Coury JR, Cerpa M, DeWald CJ, Ames CP, Shuhart C, et al. Best practice guidelines for assessment and management of osteoporosis in adult patients undergoing elective spinal reconstruction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022; 47: 128-135. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004268.

7. Boucas P, Mamdouhi T, Rizzo SE, Megas A. Cement augmentation of pedicle screw instrumentation: a literature review. Asian Spine J. 2023; 17: 939-948. doi: 10.31616/asj.2022.0216.

8. Daher M, Kreichati G, Kharrat K, Sebaaly A. Vertebroplasty versus kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. 2023; 171: 65-71. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.11.123.

9. Cruz A, Ropper AE, Xu DS, Bohl M, Reece EM, Winocour SJ, et al. Failure in lumbar spinal fusion and current management modalities. Semin Plast Surg. 2021; 35: 54-62. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1726102.

10. Kim KT, Song MG, Park YJ, Lee DY, Kim DH. Cortical trajectory screw fixation in lumbar spine surgery: a review of the existing literature. Asian Spine J. 2022; 16: 127-140. doi: 10.31616/asj.2020.0575.

11. Wu H, Shan Z, Zhao F, Cheung JPY. Poor bone quality, multilevel surgery, and narrow and tall cages are associated with intraoperative endplate injuries and late-onset cage subsidence in lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021; 480: 163-188. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001915.

12. Pu X, Wang D, Gu S. Advances in Hounsfield units value for predicting cage subsidence on spinal interbody fusion surgery. Eur Spine J. 2023; 32: 3149-3157. doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-07805-2.

13. Jiang LM, Tong YX, Jiang JJ, Pi YW, Gong Y, Tan Z, Zhao DX. The vertebral Hounsfield units can quantitatively predict the risk of adjacent vertebral fractures after percutaneous kyphoplasty. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13: 1036-1047. doi: 10.21037/qims-22-588.

14. So A, Nicolaou S. Spectral computed tomography: fundamental principles and recent developments. Korean J Radiol. 2021; 22: 86-96. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2020.0144.

15. Forghani R, De Man B, Gupta R. Dual-energy computed tomography: physical principles, approaches to scanning, usage, and implementation: Part 2. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2017; 27: 385-400. doi: 10.1016/j.nic.2017.03.003.