medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-7749 (Electronic)
ISSN 2992-7897 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de difusión científica de la Asociación Mexicana de Cirujanos de Columna A. C. y de la Sociedad Iberolatinoamericana de Columna. SILACO.

Indizada en:

Scielo

2026, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Cir Columna 2026; 4 (4)

Comparation of the Hounsfield units versus bone densitometry in the diagnosis of osteoporosis

Bazán PL, Cinalli M, Sirna P

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 294-297
PDF size: 590.11 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: osteoporosis is a skeletal disease characterized by alterations in microarchitecture that results in fragility and predisposition to fractures. The diagnostic gold standard is bone densitometry. Many alternatives have been analyzed to assess “bone health”, one of them is the measurement of Hounsfield units (HU) in tomography. Objective: to compare the use of HU with DEXA, calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of tomography for osteoporosis diagnosis and evaluate whether these results vary according to the age of patients. Material and methods: a cross-sectional study with patients over 55 years of age, using densitometry and contemporary tomography. Region of Interest (ROI) in R1 axial cut was measured. Results: 54 patients were admitted, with an average age of 70.46 years, with IC95%; 39 had a diagnosis of osteoporosis due to HU and 27 by bone densitometry; in 20 cases no diagnostic correlation was found. HU: 85% sensitivity, 41% specificity, 59% positive predictive value and 73% negative predictive value. The agreement between the two studies was 62.96. The group of over 65 years, sensitivity increased to 90%, specificity was 21%. Conclusions: HU measurement exhibits high sensitivity and low specificity, making it a valuable screening method in existing computed tomography (CT) scans; however, it is not a substitute for bone densitometry. Further large-scale studies are required.


REFERENCES

  1. Alexeeva L, Burkhardt P, Christiansen C, Cooper C,Delmas P, Johnell O, et al. Assessment of fracture riskand its application to screening for postmenopausalosteoporosis. World Health Organization - TechnicalReport Series. 1994; 843: 1-129.

  2. Mazess RB, Barden HS. Measurement of bone by dualphotonabsorptiometry (DPA) and dual-energy X-rayabsorptiometry (DEXA). Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1988; 77:197-203.

  3. Hounsfield GN. Computerized transverse axial scanning(tomography): part I. Description of system. 1973. Br JRadiol. 1995; 68: H166-H172.

  4. Gausden EB, Nwachukwu BU, Schreiber JJ, LorichDG, Lane JM. Opportunistic use of CT imaging forosteoporosis screening and bone density assessment:a qualitative systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2017; 99: 1580-1590. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00749.

  5. Anderson PA, Polly DW, Binkley NC, Pickhardt PJ.Clinical use of opportunistic computed tomographyscreening for osteoporosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100: 2073-2081. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.01376.

  6. Schreiber JJ, Anderson PA, Hsu WK. Use ofcomputed tomography for assessing bone mineraldensity. Neurosurg Focus. 2014; 37: E4. doi:10.3171/2014.5.FOCUS1483.

  7. Kim KJ, Kim DH, Lee JI, Choi BK, Han IH, Nam KH.Hounsfield units on lumbar computed tomography forpredicting regional bone mineral density. Open Med(Wars). 2019; 14: 545-551. doi: 10.1515/med-2019-0061.

  8. Zou D, Li W, Deng C, Du G, Xu N. The use of CTHounsfield unit values to identify the undiagnosedspinal osteoporosis in patients with lumbar degenerativediseases. Eur Spine J. 2019; 28: 1758-1766. doi:10.1007/s00586-018-5776-9.

  9. Choi MK, Kim SM, Lim JK. Diagnostic efficacy ofHounsfield units in spine CT for the assessment of realbone mineral density of degenerative spine: correlationstudy between T-scores determined by DEXA scan andHounsfield units from CT. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016;158: 1421-1427. doi: 10.1007/s00701-016-2821-5.

  10. Bazán PL, Jordan RC, Cevallos JRM, Adaro AO,Adaro JCS. Hounsfield units use in spinal surgeryplanning: systematic review and meta-analysis. Coluna/Columna. 2022; 21: e264579. doi: 10.1590/S1808-185120222103264579

  11. Chen JW, McCandless MG, Bhandarkar AR, FlaniganPM, Lakomkin N, Mikula AL, et al. The associationbetween bone mineral density and proximal junctionalkyphosis in adult spinal deformity: a systematic reviewand meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2023; 39: 82-91.doi: 10.3171/223.2.SPINE221101.

  12. Flanigan PM, Mikula AL, Peters PA, Oushy S,Fogelson JL, Bydon M, et al. Regional improvements inlumbosacropelvic Hounsfield units following teriparatidetreatment. Neurosurg Focus. 2020; 49: e11. doi:10.3171/220.5.FOCUS2273.

  13. Amin MFM, Zakaria WMW, Yahya N. Correlationbetween Hounsfield unit derived from head, thorax,abdomen, spine and pelvis CT and t-scores from DXA.Skeletal Radiol. 2021; 50: 2525-2535. doi: 10.1007/s0256-21-03801-z.

  14. Schreiber JJ, Anderson PA, Rosas HG, Buchholz AL, AuAG. Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral densityand strength: a tool for osteoporosis management. JBone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 1057-1063. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00160.

  15. Dimar J, Bisson EF, Dhall S, Harrop JS, Hoh DJ,Mohamed B, et al. Congress of Neurological Surgeonssystematic review and evidence-based guidelinesfor perioperative spine: preoperative osteoporosisassessment. Neurosurgery. 2021; 89: S19-S25. doi:10.1093/neuros/nyab317.

  16. Zaidi Q, Danisa OA, Cheng W. Measurement techniquesand utility of Hounsfield unit values for assessment ofbone quality prior to spinal instrumentation: a reviewof current literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44:e239-e244. doi: 10.1097/BRS.000000000002813.

  17. Aydin-Ozturk P, Arac E, Ozturk U, Arac S. Estimationof bone mineral density with hounsfield unitmeasurement. Br J Neurosurg. 2024; 38: 464-467. doi:10.1080/2688697.221.1888877.

  18. Zou D, Jiang S, Zhou S, Sun Z, Zhong W, Du G, etal. Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients undergoinglumbar fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases:a combination of DXA and Hounsfield units. Spine(Phila Pa 1976). 2020; 45: e406-e410. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003284.

  19. Mousavi SZ, Moshfeghinia R, Molavi-Vardanjani H,Sasani MR. Opportunistic screening of osteoporosisby CT scan compared to DXA: a systematic review andmeta-analysis. Clin Imaging. 2025; 118: 110372. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.224.110372.

  20. Khadivi G, Akhtari A, Sharifi F, Zargarian N, EsmaeiliS, Ahsaie MG, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of artificialintelligence models in detecting osteoporosis usingdental images: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporos Int. 2025; 36: 1-19. doi: 10.1007/s00198-24-07229-8.

  21. Yamamoto N, Shiroshita A, Kimura R, Kamo T, OgiharaH, Tsuge T. Diagnostic accuracy of chest X-ray and CTusing artificial intelligence for osteoporosis: systematicreview and meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Metab. 2024;42: 483-491. doi: 10.1007/s00774-24-01532-4.

  22. Hu F, Li X, Zhao D, Chen C, Liu G, Yang Q. The diagnosticvalue of MRI-based vertebral bone quality score forosteoporosis or osteopenia in patients undergoinglumbar surgery: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int. 2024;35: 1881-1895. doi: 10.1007/s00198-24-07190-6.

  23. Alemán OLE, Ladewing BG, Canales NJA, Hurtado PA,Abrego SAA. Relación entre unidades Hounsfield entomografía axial computarizada de columna lumbar yla densitometría ósea. Cir Columba. 2026; 4: 110-115.doi: 10.353.66/122422.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com