Cervical Spine Bone Density in Young Healthy Adults As a Function of Sex, Vertebral Level and Anatomic Location

Overview

Journal Eur Spine J

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2017 May 8

PMID 28478522

Citations 5

Authors

William J Anderst

Tyler West

William F Donaldson 3rd

Joon Y Lee

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Bone mineral density (BMD) measured using quantitative computed tomography (QCT) has been shown to correlate with bone mechanical properties. Knowledge of BMD within specific anatomic regions of the spine is valuable to surgeons who must secure instrumentation to the vertebrae, to medical device developers who design screws and disc replacements, and to researchers who assign mechanical properties to computational models. The objective of this study was to comprehensively characterize BMD in the cervical spine of young healthy adults.

Methods: QCT was used to determine BMD in the cervical spines of 31 healthy adults (age 20-35). Subject-specific 3D models of each vertebra were created from CT scans, and anatomic regions of interest were identified in each bone (C1: 3 regions; C2: 9 regions, C3-C7: 13 regions). Statistical tests were performed to identify differences in BMD according to vertebral level, anatomic regions within vertebrae, and sex.

Results: BMD varied significantly among vertebral levels and among anatomic regions within each vertebra. Females had higher BMD than males (p = .041) primarily due to higher BMD in the posterior regions of each vertebra.

Conclusions: These data can serve as a baseline to identify BMD changes in older and symptomatic patients. This data set is also the first report of volumetric bone density within different anatomic regions of the atlas and axis of the cervical spine. The finding of higher BMD in females is in agreement with the previous QCT results but contradicts DEXA results that are known to be dependent upon bone size.

Citing Articles

Automated segmentation of the sacro-iliac joints, posterior spinal joints and discovertebral units on low-dose computed tomography for Na[F]F PET lesion detection in spondyloarthritis patients.

van der Heijden W, van Velden F, Hemke R, Doorschodt T, Boellaard R, van der Laken C EJNMMI Phys. 2025; 12(1):20.

PMID: 40059265 PMC: 11891110. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-025-00734-7.

Analysis of cervical bone mineral density in children and adolescents using cone beam computed tomography combined with liquid phantoms.

Wang L, Lin S, Sun C, Ma Y, Yin Y, Li Z Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):5844.

PMID: 39966573 PMC: 11836328. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-90644-6.

Regional variations in C1-C2 bone density on quantitated computed tomography and clinical implications.

Baisden J, Varghese V, Banerjee A, Yoganandan N N Am Spine Soc J. 2023; 14:100228.

PMID: 37440985 PMC: 10333715. DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100228.

Characterization of regional variation of bone mineral density in the geriatric human cervical spine by quantitative computed tomography.

Garay R, Solitro G, Lam K, Morris R, Albarghouthi A, Lindsey R PLoS One. 2022; 17(7):e0271187.

PMID: 35802639 PMC: 9269429. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271187.

Characteristics of Lumbar Bone Density in Middle-Aged and Elderly Subjects: A Correlation Study between T-Scores Determined by the DEXA Scan and Hounsfield Units from CT.

Zhang D, Wu Y, Luo S, Wang F, Li L J Healthc Eng. 2021; 2021:5443457.

PMID: 34956572 PMC: 8702328. DOI: 10.1155/2021/5443457.

References

Ryken T, Clausen J, Traynelis V, Goel V . Biomechanical analysis of bone mineral density, insertion technique, screw torque, and holding strength of anterior cervical plate screws. J Neurosurg. 1995; 83(2):325-9. View

Liu F, Cheng J, Komistek R, Mahfouz M, Sharma A . In vivo evaluation of dynamic characteristics of the normal, fused, and disc replacement cervical spines. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(23):2578-84. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318158cdf8. View

Ritzel H, Amling M, Posl M, Hahn M, Delling G . The thickness of human vertebral cortical bone and its changes in aging and osteoporosis: a histomorphometric analysis of the complete spinal column from thirty-seven autopsy specimens. J Bone Miner Res. 1997; 12(1):89-95. DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.1.89. View

Anderst W, Donaldson 3rd W, Lee J, Kang J . Three-dimensional intervertebral kinematics in the healthy young adult cervical spine during dynamic functional loading. J Biomech. 2015; 48(7):1286-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.049. View

Yoganandan N, Pintar F, Stemper B, Baisden J, Aktay R, Shender B . Trabecular bone density of male human cervical and lumbar vertebrae. Bone. 2006; 39(2):336-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2006.01.160. View

Curylo L, Lindsey R, Doherty B, Leblanc A . Segmental variations of bone mineral density in the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(3):319-22. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199602010-00013. View

Oxland T, Lund T, Jost B, Cripton P, Lippuner K, Jaeger P . The relative importance of vertebral bone density and disc degeneration in spinal flexibility and interbody implant performance. An in vitro study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(22):2558-69. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199611150-00005. View

Zink P . Performance of ventral spondylodesis screws in cervical vertebrae of varying bone mineral density. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21(1):45-52. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199601010-00010. View

Smith E, Gilligan C . Dose-response relationship between physical loading and mechanical competence of bone. Bone. 1996; 18(1 Suppl):455-505. View

10.

Stokes I, Iatridis J . Mechanical conditions that accelerate intervertebral disc degeneration: overload versus immobilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004; 29(23):2724-32. PMC: 7173624. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000146049.52152.da. View

11.

Carter D, Bouxsein M, Marcus R . New approaches for interpreting projected bone densitometry data. J Bone Miner Res. 1992; 7(2):137-45. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.5650070204. View

12.

Ellman R, Spatz J, Cloutier A, Palme R, Christiansen B, Bouxsein M . Partial reductions in mechanical loading yield proportional changes in bone density, bone architecture, and muscle mass. J Bone Miner Res. 2012; 28(4):875-85. PMC: 4118556. DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.1814. View

13.

Zhang X, Ordway N, Tan R, Rim B, Fayyazi A . Correlation of ProDisc-C failure strength with cervical bone mineral content and endplate strength. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008; 21(6):400-5. DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318157d382. View

14.

Heller J, Estes B, Zaouali M, Diop A . Biomechanical study of screws in the lateral masses: variables affecting pull-out resistance. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996; 78(9):1315-21. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199609000-00004. View

15.

Michalek A, Buckley M, Bonassar L, Cohen I, Iatridis J . Measurement of local strains in intervertebral disc anulus fibrosus tissue under dynamic shear: contributions of matrix fiber orientation and elastin content. J Biomech. 2009; 42(14):2279-85. PMC: 2757465. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.06.047. View

16.

Iatridis J, MacLean J, Roughley P, Alini M . Effects of mechanical loading on intervertebral disc metabolism in vivo. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88 Suppl 2:41-6. PMC: 3697474. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.E.01407. View

17.

Baba H, Furusawa N, Imura S, Kawahara N, Tsuchiya H, Tomita K . Late radiographic findings after anterior cervical fusion for spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18(15):2167-73. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199311000-00004. View

18.

Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schnake K, Lucke M, Schroder R . Comparison between sheep and human cervical spines: an anatomic, radiographic, bone mineral density, and biomechanical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(9):1028-37. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200105010-00008. View

19.

Pitzen T, Schmitz B, Georg T, Barbier D, Beuter T, Steudel W . Variation of endplate thickness in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J. 2004; 13(3):235-40. PMC: 3468129. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-003-0648-2. View

20.

Ordway N, Lu Y, Zhang X, Cheng C, Fang H, Fayyazi A . Correlation of cervical endplate strength with CT measured subchondral bone density. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16(12):2104-9. PMC: 2140123. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0482-z. View