4.6 Article

Preoperative MRI-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score assessment in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion

Journal

SPINE JOURNAL
Volume 22, Issue 8, Pages 1301-1308

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.03.006

Keywords

Bone quality; MRI; Osteoporosis; Spine surgery; VBQ; QCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between VBQ and spine QCT BMD measurements and assess whether the VBQ score can predict the presence of osteopenia/osteoporosis diagnosed with QCT. The results showed that the VBQ score had moderate diagnostic ability to differentiate patients with normal BMD versus osteopenic/osteoporotic BMD based on QCT.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The importance of bone status assessment in spine surgery is well recognized. The current gold standard for assessing bone mineral density is dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). However, DEXA has been shown to overestimate BMD in patients with spinal degenerative disease and obesity. Consequently, alternative radiographic measurements using data routinely gathered during preoperative evaluation have been explored for the evaluation of bone quality and fracture risk. Opportunistic quantitative computed tomography (QCT) and more recently, the MRI-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score, have both been shown to correlate with DEXA T-scores and predict osteoporotic fractures. However, to date the direct association between VBQ and QCT has not been studied. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the correlation between VBQ and spine QCT BMD measurements and assess whether the recently described novel VBQ score can predict the presence of osteopenia/osteoporosis diagnosed with QCT. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Cross-sectional study using retrospectively collected data. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing lumbar fusion from 2014-2019 at a single, academic institution with available preoperative lumbar CT and T1-weighted MRIs were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Correlation of the VBQ score with BMD measured by QCT, and association between VBQ score and presence of osteopenia/osteoporosis. METHODS: Asynchronous QCT measurements were performed. The average Ll-L2 BMD was calculated and patients were categorized as either normal BMD (>120 mg/cm(3)) or osteopenic/osteoporotic (<= 120 mg/cm(3)). The VBQ score was calculated by dividing the median signal intensity of the L1-L4 vertebral bodies by the signal intensity of the cerebrospinal fluid on midsagittal T1-weighted MRI images. Inter-observer reliability testing of the VBQ measurements was performed. Demographic data and the VBQ score were compared between the normal and osteopenic/osteoporotic group. To determine the area-under-curve (AUC) of the VBQ score as a predictor of osteopenia/osteoporosis receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed. VBQ scores were compared with QCT BMD using the Pearson's correlation. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients (53% female) were included. The mean age was 62 years and the mean BMI was 28.2 kg/m(2). The inter-observer reliability of the VBQ measurements was excellent (ICC of 0.90). When comparing the patients with normal QCT BMD to those with osteopenia/osteoporosis, the patients with osteopenia/osteoporosis were significantly older (64.9 vs. 56.7 years, p<.0001). The osteopenic/osteoporotic group had significantly higher VBQ scores (2.6 vs. 2.2, p<.0001). The VBQ score showed a statistically significant negative correlation with QCT BMD (correlation coefficient = -0.358, 95% CI -0.473 - -0.23, p<.001). Using a VBQ score cutoff value of 2.388, the categorical VBQ score yielded a sensitivity of 74.3% and a specificity of 57.0% with an AUC of 0.7079 to differentiate patients with osteopenia/osteoporosis and with normal BMD. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the VBQ score showed moderate diagnostic ability to differentiate patients with normal BMD versus osteopenic/osteoporotic BMD based on QCT. VBQ may be an interesting adjunct to clinically performed bone density measurements in the future. (C) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available