Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleLumbar Spine

Canal Bone Ratio for Predicting Bone Mineral Density in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases

Akihiko Hiyama, Daisuke Sakai, Hiroyuki Katoh, Masato Sato and Masahiko Watanabe
International Journal of Spine Surgery March 2025, 8727; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8727
Akihiko Hiyama
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Akihiko Hiyama
  • For correspondence: a.hiyama@tokai-u.jp
Daisuke Sakai
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hiroyuki Katoh
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Hiroyuki Katoh
Masato Sato
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Masahiko Watanabe
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Japan
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Method for measuring canal bone ratio (CBR). This figure illustrates the measurement of CBR using the femoral shaft, with an inner diameter of 15.7 mm and an outer diameter of 28.3 mm. The calculated CBR is 0.554 (CBR = inner diameter/outer diameter).

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Correlation graphs between (A) CBR and low T score and (B) CBR and age. Although a correlation was observed between CBR and T score (r = −0.361, P < 0.001), there was no correlation between CBR and age (r = 0.164, P = 0.100). Abbreviation: CBR, canal bone ratio.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    ROC curve for osteoporosis in patients with lumbar degenerative disease. The results of the ROC curve analysis and the AUC of CBR-7 for the proximal femora are shown. Abbreviations: AUC, area under the curve; CBR, canal bone ratio; ROC, receiver operating characteristic.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Baseline characteristics of patients (N = 102).

    CharacteristicValue
    Age, y, mean (SD)73.3 (7.6)
    Sex, men/women, n 49/53
    Height, cm, mean (SD)157.2 (8.8)
    Body weight, kg, mean (SD)60.0 (12.7)
    BMI, mean (SD)24.2 (3.8)
    Indications, n (%)
     LCS+ (LDS)88 (86)
     Degenerative lumbar scoliosis9 (9)
     Foraminal stenosis4 (4)
     Lumbar disc herniation1 (1)
    Lumbar BMD, mean (SD)0.978 (0.227)
    Lumbar YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)99.6 (22.8)
    Lumbar spine T score, mean (SD)0 (2.0)
    Femoral neck BMD, mean (SD)0.652 (0.143)
    Femoral neck YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)82.2 (17.9)
    Femoral neck T score, mean (SD)−1.6 (1.6)
    Low T score, mean (SD)−1.7 (1.5)
    Low YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)81.3 (17.3)
    T score, n (%)
     Normal (>−1.0)30 (29)
     Osteopenia (<−1.0, >−2.5)40 (39)
     Osteoporosis (<−2.5)32 (31)
    Inner diameter of the femoral shaft, mean (SD)14.1 (2.0)
    Outer diameter of the femoral shaft, mean (SD)28.7 (2.4)
    CBR, mean (SD)0.491 (0.058)
    • Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density; BMI, body mass index; CBR, canal bone ratio; LCS, lumbar canal stenosis; LDS, lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis; YAM, young adult mean.

    • Note: Lower values of the 2 measured BMD sites signified “low T score” and “low YAM BMD.”

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Spearman product-moment correlation matrix between HU at L1−L4 and VBQ scores.

    VariableCBRHU at L1HU at L2HU at L3HU at L4HU at L1−L4
    CBR
     r 1.000−0.340*−0.385*−0.310*−0.290*−0.347*
     P  0.001<0.0010.0020.004<0.001
    HU at L1
     r  1.0000.867*0.597*0.649*0.853*
     P   <0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
    HU at L2
     r   1.0000.698*0.686*0.905*
     P    <0.001<0.001<0.001
    HU at L3
     r    1.0000.639*0.870*
     P     <0.001<0.001
    HU at L4
     r     1.0000.843*
     P      <0.001
    HU at L1–L4
     r      1.000
     P       
    • Abbreviations: CBR, canal bone ratio; HU, Hounsfield units; VBQ, vertebral body quality.

    • *P < 0.05 indicates significant differences.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Spearman product-moment correlation matrix between lumbar T score, femoral neck T score, low T score, and HU values.

    VariableCBRLumbar T scoreFemoral neck
    T score
    Low T score
    CBR
     r 1.000−0.425*−0.338*−0.361*
     P  <0.0010.001<0.001
    Lumbar T score
     r  1.0000.718*0.776*
     P   <0.001<0.001
    Femoral neck
    T score
     r   1.0000.981*
     P    <0.001
    Low T score
     r    1.000
     P     
    • Abbreviation: HU, Hounsfield units.

    • *P < 0.05 indicates significant differences.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Comparison of clinical outcomes in osteoporotic vs nonosteoporotic patients.

    CharacteristicNonosteoporosis (n = 70)Osteoporosis (n = 32) P
    Age, y, mean (SD)72.1 (8.0)76.1 (5.6)0.011a
    Sex, men/women, n 43/276/26<0.001a
    Height, cm, mean (SD)159.6 (8.5)151.9 (7.2)<0.001a
    Body weight, kg, mean (SD)63.8 (12.6)51.9 (8.4)<0.001a
    BMI, mean (SD)24.9 (3.7)22.5 (3.3)0.002a
    Tobacco use, n (%)13 (19)3 (9)0.194
    Steroid use, n (%)4 (6)6 (19)0.092
    Indications, n (%)
     LCS+ (LDS)61 (87)27 (84)0.362
     Degenerative lumbar scoliosis7 (10)2 (6)
     Foraminal stenosis1 (1)3 (9)
     Lumbar disc herniation1 (1)0 (0)
    Lumbar BMD, mean (SD)1.059 (0.213)0.800(0.134)<0.001a
    Lumbar YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)107.8 (21.5)81.5 (13.1)<0.001a
    Lumbar spine T score, mean (SD)0.7 (1.9)−1.6 (1.1)<0.001a
    Femoral neck BMD, mean (SD)0.717 (0.119)0.509 (0.065)<0.001a
    Femoral neck YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)90.5 (14.9)64.1 (7.6)<0.001a
    Femoral neck T score, mean (SD)−0.9 (1.3)−3.2 (0.6)<0.001a
    Low YAM BMD, %, mean (SD)89.3 (14.4)63.7 (7.1)<0.001a
    Low T score, mean (SD)−0.9 (1.3)−3.2 (0.6)<0.001a
    Inner diameter of the femoral shaft, mean (SD)13.9 (2.0)14.5 (1.9)0.200
    Outer diameter of the femoral shaft, mean (SD)29.2 (2.3)27.7 (2.4)0.005a
    CBR, mean (SD)0.477 (0.056)0.521 (0.050)<0.001a
    • Abbreviations: BMD, bone mineral density; BMI, body mass index; CBR, canal bone ratio; LCS, lumbar canal stenosis; LDS, lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis; YAM, young adult mean.

    • Note: Data presented as mean (SD) or number of patients (%).

    • ↵a Statistically significant.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Cutoff values for CBR: sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, recall, precision, and AUC with 95% CI.

    MeasureAUC95% CISensitivitySpecificityAccuracyRecallPrecisionCutoff Value
    CBR0.7150.611–0.8190.6560.6710.6670.6560.4770.501
    • Abbreviations: AUC, area under the curve; BMD, bone mineral density; CBR, canal bone ratio.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Osteoporotic and nonosteoporotic patients by CBR.

    Bone Mineral DensityCBR >0.501CBR <0.501Total
    Osteoporosis211132
    Nonosteoporosis234770
    Total4458102
    • Abbreviation: CBR, canal bone ratio.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery: 19 (S2)
International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 19, Issue S2
1 Apr 2025
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Canal Bone Ratio for Predicting Bone Mineral Density in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Canal Bone Ratio for Predicting Bone Mineral Density in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases
Akihiko Hiyama, Daisuke Sakai, Hiroyuki Katoh, Masato Sato, Masahiko Watanabe
International Journal of Spine Surgery Mar 2025, 8727; DOI: 10.14444/8727

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Canal Bone Ratio for Predicting Bone Mineral Density in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases
Akihiko Hiyama, Daisuke Sakai, Hiroyuki Katoh, Masato Sato, Masahiko Watanabe
International Journal of Spine Surgery Mar 2025, 8727; DOI: 10.14444/8727
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Comparison of Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, 360° Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Arthroplasty for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Focus on Nerve Decompression and Painful Spinal Instability Resolution
  • Recovery Trajectories After Lumbar Fusion Stratified by Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Disability Levels
  • Association Between Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs Use and Surgical Outcomes Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion: A Medical Claims Database Analysis
Show more Lumbar Spine

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • canal bone ratio
  • osteoporosis
  • lumbar degenerative disease
  • bone mineral density
  • hounsfield units

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire