Which screw corridors can be used for bilateral fragility fractures of the pelvis with a transverse fracture component (FFP IVb)?

Sarah Hoppler, Dmitry Notov, Suzanne Zeidler, Philipp Pieroh, Stephanie Einhorn, Christian Kleber, Andreas Höch, Georg Osterhoff
{"title":"Which screw corridors can be used for bilateral fragility fractures of the pelvis with a transverse fracture component (FFP IVb)?","authors":"Sarah Hoppler, Dmitry Notov, Suzanne Zeidler, Philipp Pieroh, Stephanie Einhorn, Christian Kleber, Andreas Höch, Georg Osterhoff","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fragility fractures of the pelvis are becoming increasingly important in an ageing society. However, they are under-represented in the current research literature. In particular, unstable bilateral fragility fractures of the sacrum (FFP IVb) benefit from surgical treatment, but individual fracture patterns need to be considered in the surgical decision. This study describes the sacral anatomy in patients with FFP IVb pelvic fractures, with particular emphasis on the identification and evaluation of possible trans-sacral screw corridors, with particular emphasis on the transverse fracture components.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Design: Retrospective clinical study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Level 1 trauma center. Patient Selection Criteria: The study reviewed 100 patients admitted for bilateral FFP with a transverse fracture between 01 / 2013 and 11 / 2023 that had a preoperative computed tomography (CT) of the pelvis including the fifth vertebra, treated with FFP IVb using preoperative multiplanar CT scans to analyze sacral anatomy. Outcome Measures and Comparisons: Sacral types and transitional abnormalities were classified, and corridor dimensions for S1 and S2 were measured, including estimated bone density using Hounsfield units. Bone corridors ≥ 8 mm were considered adequate. In addition, possible trans-sacral screw corridors were evaluated, taking into account the transverse fracture component.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While large trans-sacral screw corridors (≥ 8 mm) for S1 and S2 were identifiable in most cases, the actual feasibility for screw placement was limited due to the transverse fracture component's location, resulting in meaningful corridors in only 80 % for S1 and 47 % for S2. Additionally, in 4 % of patients without an S1 corridor, trans-sacral screw fixation was deemed inadequate due to the fracture line passing through S2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results indicate that not all FFP IVb fractures can be effectively stabilized using trans-sacral screw or bar fixation, necessitating alternative techniques for some cases. Furthermore, precise preoperative planning is essential for the management of these fractures due to complexity of anatomy. To identify the most suitable treatment approaches, further clinical studies are required.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":94042,"journal":{"name":"Injury","volume":"56 2","pages":"112171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2025.112171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Fragility fractures of the pelvis are becoming increasingly important in an ageing society. However, they are under-represented in the current research literature. In particular, unstable bilateral fragility fractures of the sacrum (FFP IVb) benefit from surgical treatment, but individual fracture patterns need to be considered in the surgical decision. This study describes the sacral anatomy in patients with FFP IVb pelvic fractures, with particular emphasis on the identification and evaluation of possible trans-sacral screw corridors, with particular emphasis on the transverse fracture components.

Methods: Design: Retrospective clinical study.

Setting: Level 1 trauma center. Patient Selection Criteria: The study reviewed 100 patients admitted for bilateral FFP with a transverse fracture between 01 / 2013 and 11 / 2023 that had a preoperative computed tomography (CT) of the pelvis including the fifth vertebra, treated with FFP IVb using preoperative multiplanar CT scans to analyze sacral anatomy. Outcome Measures and Comparisons: Sacral types and transitional abnormalities were classified, and corridor dimensions for S1 and S2 were measured, including estimated bone density using Hounsfield units. Bone corridors ≥ 8 mm were considered adequate. In addition, possible trans-sacral screw corridors were evaluated, taking into account the transverse fracture component.

Results: While large trans-sacral screw corridors (≥ 8 mm) for S1 and S2 were identifiable in most cases, the actual feasibility for screw placement was limited due to the transverse fracture component's location, resulting in meaningful corridors in only 80 % for S1 and 47 % for S2. Additionally, in 4 % of patients without an S1 corridor, trans-sacral screw fixation was deemed inadequate due to the fracture line passing through S2.

Conclusions: These results indicate that not all FFP IVb fractures can be effectively stabilized using trans-sacral screw or bar fixation, necessitating alternative techniques for some cases. Furthermore, precise preoperative planning is essential for the management of these fractures due to complexity of anatomy. To identify the most suitable treatment approaches, further clinical studies are required.

Level of evidence: III.

哪些螺钉通道可用于双侧骨盆脆性骨折伴横向骨折(FFP IVb)?
背景:在老龄化社会中,骨盆脆性骨折变得越来越重要。然而,在目前的研究文献中,它们的代表性不足。特别是,不稳定的双侧骶骨脆性骨折(FFP IVb)从手术治疗中获益,但在手术决定时需要考虑个体骨折类型。本研究描述了FFP IVb骨盆骨折患者的骶骨解剖,特别强调了可能的经骶骨螺钉通道的识别和评估,特别强调了横向骨折成分。方法:设计:回顾性临床研究。地点:一级创伤中心。患者选择标准:该研究回顾了2013年1月至2023年11月期间收治的100例双侧FFP横骨折患者,这些患者术前进行了骨盆(包括第五椎)CT扫描,术前使用多平面CT扫描进行FFP IVb治疗,分析骶骨解剖。结果测量和比较:对骶骨类型和过渡异常进行分类,测量S1和S2的通道尺寸,包括使用Hounsfield单位估计的骨密度。骨廊≥8mm被认为是足够的。此外,考虑到横向骨折成分,评估了可能的经骶骨螺钉通道。结果:虽然在大多数情况下,S1和S2的大经骶骨螺钉通道(≥8mm)是可识别的,但由于横向骨折部件的位置,螺钉放置的实际可行性受到限制,导致S1只有80%有意义的通道,S2只有47%。此外,在4%没有S1通道的患者中,由于骨折线穿过S2,经骶骨螺钉固定被认为是不充分的。结论:这些结果表明,并不是所有的FFP IVb骨折都能有效地使用经骶骨螺钉或棒固定,对于某些病例需要其他技术。此外,由于解剖结构的复杂性,精确的术前计划对于治疗这些骨折至关重要。为了确定最合适的治疗方法,需要进一步的临床研究。证据水平:III。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信