Significance of Cervical Spine Computed Tomography Hounsfield Units to Predict Bone Mineral Density and the Subsidence After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

Study Design: This study was a retrospective review.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation analysis between Hounsfield units (HU) and dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) based on the clinical results of patients who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery.

Summary Of Background Data: There is no technique to directly measure bone mineral density (BMD) in the cervical spine. As computed tomography is a very popular preoperative planning modality, using the HU value from that analysis to predict osteoporosis is important for patient outcomes and applications in the clinical field.

Materials And Methods: We reviewed the records for 235 patients who underwent 1-level (n=120) or 2-level (n=115) ACDF surgery. In the 1-level ACDF group, the HU was measured from C3 to C6 vertebra, while that for the 2-level ACDF group was measured from 3 surgical index vertebrae. The correlation patterns were analyzed with the corresponding DXA (T-score) for each patient. Subsidence of fusion segment was defined as change in distance between plate-tip and upper (lower) margin of the vertebra (index level) after 4 months of follow-up. In addition, to determine the relevant factors that influence fusion segment subsidence, other preoperative (C2 slope, C7 slope, C2-C7 angle, and C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis) and postoperative parameters (coronal angle and segmental angle change) were measured.

Results: The correlation coefficient between HU and DXA ranged from 0.57 to 0.71 in the 1-level ACDF group and from 0.59 to 0.66 in the 2-level ACDF group. The correlation between HU and DXA was statistically significant regardless of the degree of anterior osteophyte (r=-0.65 to 0.78). Total subsidence height was 3.8 mm after ACDF, and both HU and DXA were statistically correlated with total subsidence (r=0.26-0.28). In multivariate analysis, HU (middle vertebra) value was statistically associated with the degree of total subsidence. The high-subsidence group (≥4.5 mm) showed smaller HU values (284.1 vs. 316.0) and T-scores (-0.5 vs. 0.1) compared to the low-subsidence group (<4.5 mm). The discrepancy group, defined as cases with excess plate shift on 1 side, also showed smaller HU values (260.4 vs. 312.4) and higher degrees of total subsidence than the matched group.

Conclusions: The correlation between HU in cervical computed tomography and lumbar DXA (T-score) was statistically significant in both 1-level and 2-level ACDF. The level of BMD (HU or DXA) is a very important factor for clinically determining the amount and regularity of subsidence after ACDF. Therefore, HU can be a good alternative assessment to accurately reflect as much of the BMD degree as DXA in the cervical spine.