Search

The aim of this study was to develop a simple and reliable score which supports decision making between non-operative and operative treatment in patients with osteoporotic pelvic fractures.Between 2018 to 2020, the OF Pelvis Score was developed during a total of 5 meetings of the Working Group on Osteoporotic Fractures of the Spine Section of the German Society of Orthopaedics and Trauma. The OF Pelvis Score as a decision aid between non-surgical and surgical treatment was developed by expert consensus after analysis of numerous geriatric sacral and pelvic ring fractures from several hospitals. Subsequently, retrospective evaluation of the score was performed on consecutive patients from three hospitals.The following parameters were considered relevant to decision making between non-surgical and surgical treatment and were incorporated into the score: fracture morphology using the OF Pelvis Classification, pain status, level of mobilisation, fracture-related neurological deficits, health status, and the modifiers already integrated into the OF Pelvis classification. If the score is < 8, non-surgical therapy is recommended; if the score is > 8, surgical therapy is recommended; if the score is 8, there is a relative indication for surgery. The OF Pelvis Score was then evaluated retrospectively in a total of 107 patients, according to records. The OF Pelvis Score was 8 points in 4 patients (3.7%), all of whom received surgical treatment. Of the remaining 103 patients, 93 received score-compliant therapy (90.3%). Among these, 4 of the patients who did not receive score-compliant care refused the recommended surgery, so the actual therapy recommendation was score-compliant in 94.2%.The OF Pelvis Score can be used to derive a therapy recommendation in many patients in clinical practice. Because of the possible change of clinical parameters during the course of the disease, the score has a dynamic character. In the retrospective evaluation, the recommendations from the OF Pelvis Score were in close accordance with the therapy actually performed., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Odontoid fractures in geriatric patients represent an entity of increasing incidence with a high rate of morbidity and mortality. The optimal diagnostic and therapeutic management is being controversially discussed in the literature., Methods: In a consensus process and based on the current literature, the members of the working groups "Osteoporotic Fractures" and "Upper Cervical Spine" of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU) defined recommendations for the diagnostics and treatment of odontoid fractures in geriatric patients., Results: For the diagnosis of odontoid fractures in symptomatic patients, computed tomography represents the gold standard, along with conventional radiographs. Magnetic resonance and dynamic imaging can be used as ancillary imaging modalities. With regard to fracture classification, the systems described by Anderson/D'Alonzo and by Eysel/Roosen have proved to be of value. A treatment algorithm was developed based on these classifications. Anderson/D'Alonzo type 1, type 3, and non-displaced type 2 fractures usually can be treated non-operatively. However, a close clinical and radiological follow-up is essential. In Anderson/D'Alonzo type 2 fractures, operative treatment is associated with better fracture healing. Displaced type 2 and type 3 fractures should be stabilized operatively. Type 2 fractures with suitable fracture patterns (Eysel/Roosen 2A/B) can be stabilized anteriorly. Posterior C I/II-stabilization procedures are well established and suitable for all fracture patterns., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest./Die Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)