-
Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery &... Feb 2021Osteoporosis is a public health problem that is contributing to an increasing number of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The aim of this lecture is to summarize the... (Review)
Review
Osteoporosis is a public health problem that is contributing to an increasing number of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The aim of this lecture is to summarize the current state of knowledge about osteoporotic fractures by answering five questions. 1/How does the spine typically age and how is osteoporosis diagnosed? Various normal aging processes will gradually modify the vertebral column (static, dynamic, bone quality). Osteoporosis is diagnosed through a DEXA scan. 2/How is an osteoporotic fracture evaluated clinically and radiologically? Magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred modality for making the diagnosis and selecting the most appropriate treatment. 3/What are the treatment options for an osteoporotic fracture? The options are conservative treatment, conventional surgery, and minimally invasive techniques (cementoplasty, percutaneous instrumentation). 4/Which fractures should be treated, and which technique should be used? The choice is clear when neurological deficits are present, although the indications are less firm when there is no deficit. The treatment can be conservative (back brace) if the fracture is non-displaced and minimally painful, vertebroplasty if the fracture is painful and shows hyperintensity on T2-STIR sequences, vertebral expansion if the radiological deformity worsens along with symptoms. 5/What are the technical challenges and complications related to the presence of osteoporosis when treating vertebral fractures surgically? The reduced bone stock increases the risk of poor implant hold and postoperative mechanical complications (adjacent fracture, junctional kyphosis). Technical solutions have been developed (augmented screw fixation, transitional zone) to limit their impact. It is essential to know and master these techniques, and their indications. Treatment of the osteoporosis itself is crucial. Level of evidence V; Expert opinion.
Topics: Bone Cements; Fractures, Compression; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Spinal Fractures; Spine; Treatment Outcome; Vertebroplasty
PubMed: 33321233
DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2020.102779 -
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences Apr 2021Vertebral compression fracture is a hallmark of osteoporosis (OP) and by far the most prevalent fragility fracture. It is well proven that patients who develop a... (Review)
Review
Vertebral compression fracture is a hallmark of osteoporosis (OP) and by far the most prevalent fragility fracture. It is well proven that patients who develop a vertebral compression fracture are at substantial risk for additional fractures. Diagnosis is based on adequate clinical evaluation, imaging, and laboratory tests. The imaging of OP and fragility fractures includes conventional radiology to evaluate spinal fractures, bone mineral density (BMD) testing by dual energy x-ray densitometry, quantitative computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, bone scintigraphy (if necessary), and ultrasound. Screening and treatment of individuals with high risk of osteoporotic fracture are cost-effective, but approximately two-thirds of the vertebral compression fractures (VCF) that occur each year are not accurately diagnosed and, therefore, not treated. Evaluation of VCFs, even though they may be asymptomatic, seems essential to health-related and/or clinical research on OP.
Topics: Bone Density; Female; Fractures, Compression; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Male; Mass Screening; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Spinal Fractures; Spine; Thoracic Vertebrae
PubMed: 32967415
DOI: 10.3906/sag-2005-315 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2019This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of teriparatide and bisphosphonates for reducing vertebral fracture risk and bone mineral density (BMD) in lumbar spine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of teriparatide and bisphosphonates for reducing vertebral fracture risk and bone mineral density (BMD) in lumbar spine and femoral neck in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
METHODS
We searched the literature, via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Google database to screen citations from inception to April 2018 for inclusion in this study. Only randomized controlled trials that compared teriparatide and bisphosphonates for reducing vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis were included. Stata 12.0 was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis results indicated that, compared with bisphosphonates, teriparatide was associated with a reduction of the vertebral fracture risk (risk ratio (RR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35, 0.93, P = 0.024). Furthermore, teriparatide therapy increased the mean percent change in BMD in lumbar spine of 6 months, 12 months and 18 months than bisphosphonates with statistically significant (P < 0.05). And, teriparatide has only beneficial in increasing the mean percent change in BMD in femoral neck of 18 months (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between teriparatide and bisphosphonates in terms of the adverse events (AEs, RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.89, 1.33, P = 0.424).
CONCLUSIONS
Teriparatide is an effective agent in reducing the risk of vertebral fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Furthermore, teriparatide can increase the BMD in lumbar spine and femoral neck in long-terms duration.
Topics: Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diphosphonates; Female; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Publication Bias; Risk Reduction Behavior; Spinal Fractures; Teriparatide
PubMed: 30890377
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.03.004 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Dec 2013To review the evidence on diagnostic accuracy of red flag signs and symptoms to screen for fracture or malignancy in patients presenting with low back pain to primary,... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To review the evidence on diagnostic accuracy of red flag signs and symptoms to screen for fracture or malignancy in patients presenting with low back pain to primary, secondary, or tertiary care.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, OldMedline, Embase, and CINAHL from earliest available up to 1 October 2013.
INCLUSION CRITERIA
Primary diagnostic studies comparing red flags for fracture or malignancy to an acceptable reference standard, published in any language.
REVIEW METHODS
Assessment of study quality and extraction of data was conducted by three independent assessors. Diagnostic accuracy statistics and post-test probabilities were generated for each red flag.
RESULTS
We included 14 studies (eight from primary care, two from secondary care, four from tertiary care) evaluating 53 red flags; only five studies evaluated combinations of red flags. Pooling of data was not possible because of index test heterogeneity. Many red flags in current guidelines provide virtually no change in probability of fracture or malignancy or have untested diagnostic accuracy. The red flags with the highest post-test probability for detection of fracture were older age (9%, 95% confidence interval 3% to 25%), prolonged use of corticosteroid drugs (33%, 10% to 67%), severe trauma (11%, 8% to 16%), and presence of a contusion or abrasion (62%, 49% to 74%). Probability of spinal fracture was higher when multiple red flags were present (90%, 34% to 99%). The red flag with the highest post-test probability for detection of spinal malignancy was history of malignancy (33%, 22% to 46%).
CONCLUSIONS
While several red flags are endorsed in guidelines to screen for fracture or malignancy, only a small subset of these have evidence that they are indeed informative. These findings suggest a need for revision of many current guidelines.
Topics: Humans; Low Back Pain; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Spinal Fractures; Spinal Neoplasms
PubMed: 24335669
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f7095 -
BMC Emergency Medicine May 2022Spinal cord injury (SCI) and spinal fracture are major complications in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who sustain spinal trauma. The purpose of this study...
BACKGROUND
Spinal cord injury (SCI) and spinal fracture are major complications in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who sustain spinal trauma. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence, predictors, and sequelae of spinal trauma in patients with AS.
METHODS
This retrospective study included patients with AS who were admitted for spinal trauma between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2016. The study compared clinical outcomes of patients between group 1: SCI alone, group 2: spinal fracture alone (no SCI), and group 3: both SCI and spinal fracture.
RESULTS
Of the 6285 patients with AS admitted during the retrospective study period, only 105 suffered from spinal trauma and were enrolled in the study. Case number in group 1, 2, and 3 was 11(10.48%), 45(42.85%), and 49(46.67%), respectively. Among the patients with spinal fractures, 52.1% had SCI. Bamboo spine was significantly more prevalent in the fracture group than in the nonfracture group (78.7% vs. 36.4%; P = 0.006). Patients with SCI had more instances of subluxation or dislocation (48.3% vs. 8.9%; P < 0.001) and more cases of spinal epidural hematoma (SEH; 21.7% vs. 2.2%; P = 0.003) than patients without SCI. The rate of delayed diagnosis for spinal fracture was 31.4%, with one-third of patients developing delayed SCI. Among the patients with incomplete SCI, 58.3% achieved neurological improvement after treatment (P = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with AS and bamboo spine at radiograph had a higher rate of spinal fracture, which may be an important factor in SCI in patients with AS. Spinal fractures involving the C3-C7 region, subluxation or dislocation, severe spinal fracture, and SEH were found to be predictive of SCI, and SCI in patients with AS resulted in higher mortality and complication rates.
Topics: Fractures, Bone; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Cord Injuries; Spinal Fractures; Spondylitis, Ankylosing
PubMed: 35501709
DOI: 10.1186/s12873-022-00635-3 -
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research :... Feb 2018Denosumab reduces bone resorption and vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk. Denosumab discontinuation increases bone turnover markers 3 months after a scheduled dose... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Denosumab reduces bone resorption and vertebral and nonvertebral fracture risk. Denosumab discontinuation increases bone turnover markers 3 months after a scheduled dose is omitted, reaching above-baseline levels by 6 months, and decreases bone mineral density (BMD) to baseline levels by 12 months. We analyzed the risk of new or worsening vertebral fractures, especially multiple vertebral fractures, in participants who discontinued denosumab during the FREEDOM study or its Extension. Participants received ≥2 doses of denosumab or placebo Q6M, discontinued treatment, and stayed in the study ≥7 months after the last dose. Of 1001 participants who discontinued denosumab during FREEDOM or Extension, the vertebral fracture rate increased from 1.2 per 100 participant-years during the on-treatment period to 7.1, similar to participants who received and then discontinued placebo (n = 470; 8.5 per 100 participant-years). Among participants with ≥1 off-treatment vertebral fracture, the proportion with multiple (>1) was larger among those who discontinued denosumab (60.7%) than placebo (38.7%; p = 0.049), corresponding to a 3.4% and 2.2% risk of multiple vertebral fractures, respectively. The odds (95% confidence interval) of developing multiple vertebral fractures after stopping denosumab were 3.9 (2.1-7. 2) times higher in those with prior vertebral fractures, sustained before or during treatment, than those without, and 1.6 (1.3-1.9) times higher with each additional year of off-treatment follow-up; among participants with available off-treatment total hip (TH) BMD measurements, the odds were 1.2 (1.1-1.3) times higher per 1% annualized TH BMD loss. The rates (per 100 participant-years) of nonvertebral fractures during the off-treatment period were similar (2.8, denosumab; 3.8, placebo). The vertebral fracture rate increased upon denosumab discontinuation to the level observed in untreated participants. A majority of participants who sustained a vertebral fracture after discontinuing denosumab had multiple vertebral fractures, with greatest risk in participants with a prior vertebral fracture. Therefore, patients who discontinue denosumab should rapidly transition to an alternative antiresorptive treatment. Clinicaltrails.gov: NCT00089791 (FREEDOM) and NCT00523341 (Extension). © 2017 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bone Density; Denosumab; Female; Humans; Logistic Models; Middle Aged; Multivariate Analysis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Spinal Fractures; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 29105841
DOI: 10.1002/jbmr.3337 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Nov 2023With an aging population, the osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) has become a constant concern for its physical and neurological complications, such... (Review)
Review
With an aging population, the osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) has become a constant concern for its physical and neurological complications, such as spinal kyphosis and refractory pains. Compared with traditional conservative treatments, the open surgery is more superior in some ways because of its direct decompression and correction. Various operation methods applying to different indications have been developed to deal with different fracture situations, including anterior, posterior, and combined surgery. In this review, we have concluded the latest developments of the surgery treating OVCF and the internal fixation as references for spinal surgeons of the choice of suitable treatments.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Spinal Fractures; Fractures, Compression; Osteoporotic Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Treatment Outcome; Kyphosis; Lumbar Vertebrae; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37587622
DOI: 10.1111/os.13822 -
Current Osteoporosis Reports Feb 2021The purpose of this review is to summarize the recently published evidence concerning vertebral fracture risk in individuals with diabetes mellitus. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The purpose of this review is to summarize the recently published evidence concerning vertebral fracture risk in individuals with diabetes mellitus.
RECENT FINDINGS
Vertebral fracture risk is increased in individuals with T2DM. The presence of vertebral fractures in T2DM is associated with increased non-vertebral fracture risk and mortality. TBS could be helpful to estimate vertebral fracture risk in individuals with T2DM. An increased amount of bone marrow fat has been implicated in bone fragility in T2DM. Results from two recent studies show that both teriparatide and denosumab are effective in reducing vertebral fracture risk also in individuals with T2DM. Individuals with T2DM could benefit from systematic screening in the clinic for presence of vertebral fractures.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Humans; Risk Factors; Spinal Fractures
PubMed: 33432548
DOI: 10.1007/s11914-020-00646-8 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Aug 2021Combined sternal and spinal fractures are rare traumatic injuries with significant risk of spinal and thoracic wall instability. Controversy remains with regard to... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Combined sternal and spinal fractures are rare traumatic injuries with significant risk of spinal and thoracic wall instability. Controversy remains with regard to treatment strategies and the biomechanical need for sternal fixation to achieve spinal healing. The present study aimed to assess outcomes of sternovertebral fracture treatment.
METHODS
A systematic review of literature on the treatment of traumatic sternovertebral fractures was conducted. Original studies published after 1990, reporting sternal and spinal healing or stability were included. Studies not reporting treatment outcomes were excluded.
RESULTS
Six studies were included in this review, with a total study population of 98 patients: 2 case series, 3 case reports, and 1 retrospective cohort study. 10 per cent of sternal fractures showed displacement. Most spinal fractures were located in the thoracic spine and were AOSpine type A (51%), type B (35%), or type C (14%). 14 per cent of sternal fractures and 49% of spinal fractures were surgically treated. Sternal treatment failure occurred in 5% of patients and biomechanical spinal failure in 8%. There were no differences in treatment failure between conservative and operative treatment.
CONCLUSION
Literature on traumatic sternovertebral fracture treatment is sparse. Findings indicate that in most patients, sternal fixation is not required to achieve sternal and spinal stability. However, results of the current review should be cautiously interpreted, since most included studies were of poor quality.
Topics: Fractures, Bone; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Fractures; Sternum; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33006034
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-020-01505-y -
Osteoporosis International : a Journal... Mar 2021Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of...
Vertebral fractures are independent risk factors for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. Since vertebral fractures are often missed, the relatively new introduction of vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) for imaging of the lateral spine during DXA-measurement of the spine and hips may contribute to detect vertebral fractures. We advocate performing a VFA in all patients with a recent fracture visiting a fracture liaison service (FLS). Fracture liaison services (FLS) are important service models for delivering secondary fracture prevention for older adults presenting with a fragility fracture. While commonly age, clinical risk factors (including fracture site and number of prior fracture) and BMD play a crucial role in determining fracture risk and indications for treatment with antiosteoporosis medications, prevalent vertebral fractures usually remain undetected. However, vertebral fractures are important independent risk factors for future vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. A development of the DXA technology, vertebral fracture assessment (VFA), allows for assessment of the lateral spine during the regular DXA bone mineral density measurement of the lumbar spine and hips. Recent approaches to the stratification of antiosteoporosis medication type according to baseline fracture risk, and differences by age in the indication for treatment by prior fracture mean that additional information from VFA may influence initiation and type of treatment. Furthermore, knowledge of baseline vertebral fractures allows reliable definition of incident vertebral fracture events during treatment, which may modify the approach to therapy. In this manuscript, we will discuss the epidemiology and clinical significance of vertebral fractures, the different methods of detecting vertebral fractures, and the rationale for, and implications of, use of VFA routinely in FLS. • Vertebral fracture assessment is a tool available on modern DXA instruments and has proven ability to detect vertebral fractures, the majority of which occur without a fall and without the signs and symptoms of an acute fracture. • Most osteoporosis guidelines internationally suggest that treatment with antiosteoporosis medications should be considered for older individuals (e.g., 65 years +) with a recent low trauma fracture without the need for DXA. • Younger individuals postfracture may be risk-assessed on the basis of FRAX® probability including DXA and associated treatment thresholds. • Future fracture risk is markedly influenced by both site, number, severity, and recency of prior fracture; awareness of baseline vertebral fractures facilitates definition of true incident vertebral fracture events occurring during antiosteoporosis treatment. • Detection of previously clinically silent vertebral fractures, defining site of prior fracture, might alter treatment decisions in younger or older FLS patients, consistent with recent IOF-ESCEO guidance on baseline-risk-stratified therapy, and provides a reliable baseline from which to define new, potentially therapy-altering, vertebral fracture events.
Topics: Absorptiometry, Photon; Aged; Bone Density; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Spinal Fractures
PubMed: 33475820
DOI: 10.1007/s00198-020-05804-3