Radiographic Cortical Thickness of the Humerus in Detecting Post-Stroke Regional Bone Loss

June 12, 2026 updated by: Cansin Medin, Istanbul Physical Medicine Rehabilitation Training and Research Hospital

Post-stroke immobilization and reduced weight-bearing frequently lead to significant regional bone mineral density loss and asymmetry, particularly in the paretic upper extremity, which increases fracture risks. While Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for evaluating systemic bone loss, it primarily focuses on axial or lower extremity sites and lacks universal accessibility. Since routine shoulder radiographs offer an opportunistic screening tool to evaluate regional bone quality without additional radiation , this study aims to compare proximal humerus cortical bone thickness between the paretic and non-paretic sides in stroke patients and assess its correlation with systemic DXA values to determine its clinical utility.

This cross-sectional, observational study involves a retrospective data analysis of patients aged 18 and older who experienced a single unilateral stroke at least 6 months prior and present with clinical hemiparesis. Eligible participants must have concurrent standard anteroposterior shoulder radiographs and DXA measurements available from their routine clinical follow-ups. Patient demographic data, stroke characteristics, Brunnstrom stages, and systemic DXA measurements (femoral neck and lumbar spine T-scores and bone mineral density values) are systematically recorded for analysis.

Cortical bone thickness measurements are performed using ImageJ software on standard radiographs at points 10 cm and 12 cm distal to the highest point of the humerus. To ensure reliability, measurements for both the paretic and non-paretic sides are conducted independently by two researchers who are completely blinded to the DXA results. Statistical analyses, including paired t-tests or Wilcoxon tests and Pearson or Spearman correlations, will be used to compare the sides and evaluate the relationship between radiographic cortical thickness and systemic bone density.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Detailed Description

Background Post-stroke immobilization and reduced weight-bearing often lead to significant regional bone mineral density (BMD) loss and asymmetry, particularly in the paretic upper extremity, which increases fracture risks. While Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for evaluating systemic bone loss, it primarily targets axial or lower extremity sites and may not be universally accessible in every clinical setting. Routine clinical imaging, such as standard shoulder radiographs, presents a valuable opportunistic screening tool to assess regional cortical bone quality without exposing patients to additional radiation.

Objective The primary objective of this cross-sectional, observational study is to compare proximal humerus cortical bone thickness between the paretic and non-paretic sides in patients with stroke. Additionally, the study aims to evaluate the correlation between radiographic cortical thickness measurements and systemic DXA values to determine the clinical utility of standard X-rays in identifying post-stroke regional bone loss.

Study Design and Methods This retrospective data analysis will include patients aged 18 and older with a history of a single unilateral stroke occurring at least 6 months prior, and presenting with clinical hemiparesis. Eligible participants must have concurrent standard anteroposterior shoulder radiographs and DXA measurements.

Measurement Protocol: Cortical bone thickness (CBT) will be measured at 10 cm and 12 cm distal to the highest point of the humerus using standard radiographs via ImageJ software.

Blinding: Measurements will be independently performed by two separate researchers who are completely blinded to the patients' DXA results.

Comparison: The radiographic cortical thickness values from both paretic and non-paretic sides will be correlated and compared against femoral neck and lumbar spine (L1-L4) DXA T-scores and BMD values.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
65

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Locations

  • Turkey (Türkiye)
      • Istanbul, Turkey (Türkiye)
        • Recruiting
        • Istanbul Physical Medicine Rehabilitation Training and Research Hospital
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Adults aged 18 years and older recruited from the clinics of Istanbul Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Training and Research Hospital. Participants will include hemiparetic individuals with a history of a single unilateral stroke occurring at least 6 months prior, who possess concurrent standard shoulder radiographs and systemic dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients aged 18 years and older.
  • A documented history of a single unilateral stroke that occurred at least 6 months prior to evaluation.
  • Presence of clinical hemiparesis.
  • Availability of concurrent standard anteroposterior (AP) shoulder radiographs taken within 6 months post-stroke alongside systemic DXA measurements.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of surgical intervention in either shoulder. History of a proximal humerus fracture.
  • Co-existing metabolic bone diseases, such as primary hyperparathyroidism or osteomalacia.
  • History of malignancy.
  • Documented history of corticosteroid use.
  • Imaging artifacts that compromise the accuracy of DXA measurements.
  • History of a secondary stroke.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Poststroke Hemiparetic Individuals
This observational, retrospective cohort consists of hemiparetic adult patients aged 18 years and older who experienced a single, unilateral stroke at least 6 months prior. Selected participants must have concurrent systemic DXA measurements and standard anteroposterior shoulder radiographs taken within 6 months post-stroke from routine clinical follow-ups.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Difference in Proximal Humerus Cortical Bone Thickness Between Paretic and Non-Paretic Sides
Time Frame: Baseline
The average cortical bone thickness measured in millimeters on standard anteroposterior shoulder radiographs. Measurements are taken at exact locations 10 cm and 12 cm distal to the highest anatomical peak of the humerus on both the paretic and non-paretic sides to evaluate localized bone loss asymmetry.
Baseline

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Correlation Between Radiographic Cortical Bone Thickness and Systemic Bone Mineral Density
Time Frame: Baseline
The correlation between the radiographic proximal humerus cortical thickness and systemic DXA values, specifically the bone mineral density (g/cm^2) of the femoral neck and the lumbar spine.
Baseline
Correlation Between Radiographic Cortical Bone Thickness and Systemic T-scores
Time Frame: Baseline
The correlation between the humerus cortical thickness measurements and systemic DXA T-scores to determine the clinical utility of standard X-rays in reflecting systemic osteopenia or osteoporosis classifications.
Baseline

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Istanbul Physical Medicine Rehabilitation Training and Research Hospital

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 22, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
June 25, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
July 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
June 10, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 12, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
June 16, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
June 16, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 12, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
June 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • IstanbulPMRTRH5

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Osteoporosis

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings