» Articles » PMID: 35044572

Improving the Hip Fracture Risk Prediction with a Statistical Shape-and-Intensity Model of the Proximal Femur

Overview
Journal Ann Biomed Eng
Date 2022 Jan 19
PMID 35044572
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Severe predictions have been made regarding osteoporotic fracture incidence for the next years, with major economic and social impacts in a worldwide greying society. However, the performance of the currently adopted gold standard for fracture risk prediction, the areal Bone Mineral Density (aBMD), remains moderate. To overcome current limitations, the construction of statistical models of the proximal femur, based on three-dimensional shape and intensity (a hallmark of bone density), is here proposed for predicting hip fracture in a Caucasian postmenopausal cohort. Partial Least Square (PLS)-based statistical models of the shape, intensity and their combination were developed, and the corresponding modes and components were identified. Logistic regression models using the first two shape, intensity and shape-intensity PLS components were implemented and tested within a 10-fold cross-validation procedure as predictors of hip fracture. It emerged that (1) intensity components were superior to shape components in stratifying patients according to their fracture status, and that (2) a combination of intensity and shape improved patients risk stratification. The area under the ROC curve was 0.64, 0.85 and 0.92 for the models based on shape, intensity and shape-intensity combination respectively, against a 0.72 value for the aBMD standard approach. Based on these findings, the presented methodology turns out to be promising in tackling the need for an enhanced fracture risk assessment.

Citing Articles

Weakly Supervised Bayesian Shape Modeling from Unsegmented Medical Images.

Adams J, Iyer K, Elhabian S Shape Med Imaging (2024). 2024; 15275:1-17.

PMID: 39605948 PMC: 11590745.


Phantomless calibration of CT scans for hip fracture risk prediction in silico: Comparison with phantom-based calibration.

Szyszko J, Aldieri A, La Mattina A, Viceconti M PLoS One. 2024; 19(6):e0305474.

PMID: 38875268 PMC: 11178222. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305474.


A statistical shape analysis for the assessment of the main geometrical features of the distal femoral medullary canal.

Betti V, Aldieri A, Cristofolini L Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024; 12:1250095.

PMID: 38659643 PMC: 11039873. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1250095.


Effect of Artificial Intelligence or Machine Learning on Prediction of Hip Fracture Risk: Systematic Review.

Cha Y, Kim J, Kim J, Seo S, Lee S, Yoo J J Bone Metab. 2023; 30(3):245-252.

PMID: 37718902 PMC: 10509025. DOI: 10.11005/jbm.2023.30.3.245.


Site-Specific Differences in Bone Mineral Density of Proximal Femur Correlate with the Type of Hip Fracture.

Li N, Yuan Y, Yin L, Yang M, Liu Y, Zhang W Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(11).

PMID: 37296729 PMC: 10253151. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13111877.

References
1.
Johnell O, Kanis J . An estimate of the worldwide prevalence and disability associated with osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2006; 17(12):1726-33. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-006-0172-4. View

2.
Chen S, Chen Y, Cheng C, Hwang H, Chen C, Lin M . Comparisons of Different Screening Tools for Identifying Fracture/Osteoporosis Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older People. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(20):e3415. PMC: 4902389. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003415. View

3.
Ip T, Leung J, Kung A . Management of osteoporosis in patients hospitalized for hip fractures. Osteoporos Int. 2010; 21(Suppl 4):S605-14. PMC: 2974929. DOI: 10.1007/s00198-010-1398-8. View

4.
Durrleman S, Prastawa M, Charon N, Korenberg J, Joshi S, Gerig G . Morphometry of anatomical shape complexes with dense deformations and sparse parameters. Neuroimage. 2014; 101:35-49. PMC: 4871626. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.043. View

5.
Goodyear S, Barr R, McCloskey E, Alesci S, Aspden R, Reid D . Can we improve the prediction of hip fracture by assessing bone structure using shape and appearance modelling?. Bone. 2012; 53(1):188-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2012.11.042. View