Intraoperative Bone-Quality Assessments Are Reliable Compared with Opportunistic CT-Based Hounsfield Unit Measurements

BACKGROUND: Bone density can impact treatment decisions for orthopaedic conditions. While ad-hoc intraoperative surgeon assessment of bone quality is common, the accuracy of such evaluation remains unknown. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether orthopaedic surgeons' intraoperative assessment of bone quality closely correlated with validated measures. METHODS: In this prospective cross-sectional study, we enrolled adult patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery at a Level-I trauma center. Eligibility required an opportunistic computed tomography (CT) scan of the lumbar spine, glenoid, wrist, pelvis/femur, proximal tibia, or calcaneus. Seven surgeons, blinded to objective measures of bone quality, provided intraoperative bone-quality assessments using a 10-point Likert scale and categorized bone quality as normal, osteopenic, or osteoporotic. Hounsfield units (HUs) were measured on CT using a previously published technique. All images were reviewed by a single orthopaedic surgeon, blinded to intraoperative bone-quality assessments. RESULTS: Of the 229 patients enrolled, 215 had available CT data and were included in the study. The average age of these patients was 44 years (range, 18 to 95 years), with 40.5% being female. Over half of the patients (61%) were Black or African American, while a quarter of the patients (25%) were White. The most common surgical sites included the femur (39 patients, 18.1%), ankle (31, 14.4%), and acetabulum (26, 12.1%). A positive linear relationship between HU and surgeon bone-quality assessments was observed (r = 0.66; p < 0.0001), which was consistent across surgical anatomic sites. Abnormal bone quality was correctly identified by surgeon assessment with 84% sensitivity and 97% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that surgeons can reliably detect abnormal bone quality through intraoperative assessment across numerous surgical sites. Intraoperative assessments may provide actionable and reliable feedback regarding bone density without additional cost or radiation in cases when opportunistic scans are not available. This information can inform intraoperative decision-making and presents opportunities for bone-health interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Published
2026-04-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.25.00551
Primary Topic
Bone health and osteoporosis research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Intraoperative Bone-Quality Assessments Are Reliable Compared with Opportunistic CT-Based Hounsfield Unit Measurements

Jennifer Lewis, Kelly Hynes, Anthony Christiano, Lily Upp et al.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Bone health and osteoporosis research
article

Intraoperative Bone-Quality Assessments Are Reliable Compared with Opportunistic CT-Based Hounsfield Unit Measurements

Jennifer Lewis, Kelly Hynes, Anthony Christiano, Lily Upp, Jason Strelzow, Jennifer Moriatis Wolf, Mary Kate Erdman
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bone density can impact treatment decisions for orthopaedic conditions. While ad-hoc intraoperative surgeon assessment of bone quality is common, the accuracy of such evaluation remains unknown. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether orthopaedic surgeons' intraoperative assessment of bone quality closely correlated with validated measures. METHODS: In this prospective cross-sectional study, we enrolled adult patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery at a Level-I trauma center. Eligibility required an opportunistic computed tomography (CT) scan of the lumbar spine, glenoid, wrist, pelvis/femur, proximal tibia, or calcaneus. Seven surgeons, blinded to objective measures of bone quality, provided intraoperative bone-quality assessments using a 10-point Likert scale and categorized bone quality as normal, osteopenic, or osteoporotic. Hounsfield units (HUs) were measured on CT using a previously published technique. All images were reviewed by a single orthopaedic surgeon, blinded to intraoperative bone-quality assessments. RESULTS: Of the 229 patients enrolled, 215 had available CT data and were included in the study. The average age of these patients was 44 years (range, 18 to 95 years), with 40.5% being female. Over half of the patients (61%) were Black or African American, while a quarter of the patients (25%) were White. The most common surgical sites included the femur (39 patients, 18.1%), ankle (31, 14.4%), and acetabulum (26, 12.1%). A positive linear relationship between HU and surgeon bone-quality assessments was observed (r = 0.66; p < 0.0001), which was consistent across surgical anatomic sites. Abnormal bone quality was correctly identified by surgeon assessment with 84% sensitivity and 97% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that surgeons can reliably detect abnormal bone quality through intraoperative assessment across numerous surgical sites. Intraoperative assessments may provide actionable and reliable feedback regarding bone density without additional cost or radiation in cases when opportunistic scans are not available. This information can inform intraoperative decision-making and presents opportunities for bone-health interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Washington University in St. Louis (US), Henry Ford Hospital (US), University of Chicago (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Bone health and osteoporosis research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.