Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis and Sacrum: Current Trends in Literature.

Hip & pelvis Pub Date : 2022-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-07 DOI:10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.69
Erick Heiman, Pasquale Gencarelli, Alex Tang, John M Yingling, Frank A Liporace, Richard S Yoon
{"title":"Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis and Sacrum: Current Trends in Literature.","authors":"Erick Heiman,&nbsp;Pasquale Gencarelli,&nbsp;Alex Tang,&nbsp;John M Yingling,&nbsp;Frank A Liporace,&nbsp;Richard S Yoon","doi":"10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.69","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) and fragility fractures of the sacrum (FFS), which are emerging in the geriatric population, exhibit characteristics that differ from those of pelvic ring disruptions occurring in the younger population. Treatment of FFP/FFS by a multidisciplinary team can be helpful in reducing morbidity and mortality with the goal of reducing pain, regaining early mobility, and restoring independence for activities of daily living. Conservative treatment, including bed rest, pain therapy, and mobilization as tolerated, is indicated for treatment of FFP type I and type II as loss of stability is limited with these fractures. Operative treatment is indicated for FFP type II when conservative treatment has failed and for FFP type III and type IV, which are displaced fractures associated with intense pain and increased instability. Minimally invasive stabilization techniques, such as percutaneous fixation, are favored over open reduction internal fixation. There is little evidence regarding outcomes of patients with FFP/FFS and more literature is needed for determination of optimal management. The aim of this article is to provide a concise review of the current literature and a discussion of the latest recommendations for orthopedic treatment and management of FFP/FFS.</p>","PeriodicalId":73239,"journal":{"name":"Hip & pelvis","volume":"34 2","pages":"69-78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/72/94/hp-34-69.PMC9204239.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hip & pelvis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5371/hp.2022.34.2.69","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) and fragility fractures of the sacrum (FFS), which are emerging in the geriatric population, exhibit characteristics that differ from those of pelvic ring disruptions occurring in the younger population. Treatment of FFP/FFS by a multidisciplinary team can be helpful in reducing morbidity and mortality with the goal of reducing pain, regaining early mobility, and restoring independence for activities of daily living. Conservative treatment, including bed rest, pain therapy, and mobilization as tolerated, is indicated for treatment of FFP type I and type II as loss of stability is limited with these fractures. Operative treatment is indicated for FFP type II when conservative treatment has failed and for FFP type III and type IV, which are displaced fractures associated with intense pain and increased instability. Minimally invasive stabilization techniques, such as percutaneous fixation, are favored over open reduction internal fixation. There is little evidence regarding outcomes of patients with FFP/FFS and more literature is needed for determination of optimal management. The aim of this article is to provide a concise review of the current literature and a discussion of the latest recommendations for orthopedic treatment and management of FFP/FFS.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

骨盆和骶骨脆性骨折:当前文献趋势。
骨盆脆性骨折(FFP)和骶骨脆性骨折(FFS)在老年人群中出现,表现出与年轻人群中发生的骨盆环破坏不同的特征。多学科团队治疗FFP/FFS有助于降低发病率和死亡率,目标是减轻疼痛,恢复早期活动能力,恢复日常生活活动的独立性。保守治疗,包括卧床休息、疼痛治疗和可耐受的活动,适用于治疗I型和II型FFP,因为这些骨折的稳定性损失有限。对于保守治疗失败的II型FFP,以及伴有剧烈疼痛和不稳定性增加的移位性骨折的III型和IV型FFP,需要手术治疗。微创稳定技术,如经皮内固定优于切开复位内固定。关于FFP/FFS患者预后的证据很少,需要更多的文献来确定最佳管理方法。本文的目的是对目前的文献进行简要回顾,并对FFP/FFS的骨科治疗和管理的最新建议进行讨论。
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
CiteScore
2.90
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