Search

Study Design Multicenter prospective cohort studyObjective To analyse therapeutical strategies applied to osteoporotic thoracolumbar OF 4 injuries, to assess related complications and clinical outcome.Methods A multicenter prospective cohort study (EOFTT) including 518 consecutive patients who were treated for an Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF). For the present study, only patients with OF 4 fractures were analysed. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Timed Up & Go test, EQ-5D 5L, and Barthel Index after a minimum follow-up of 6 weeks.Results A total of 152 (29%) patients presented with OF 4 fractures with a mean age of 76 years (range 41-97). The most common treatment was short-segment posterior stabilization (51%; hybrid stabilization in 36%). Mean follow up was 208 days (±131 days), mean ODI was 30 ± 21. Dorsoventral stabilized patients were younger compared to the other groups (P< .001) and had significant better TuG compared to hybrid stabilization (P= .049). The other clinical outcomes did not differ in the therapy strategies (VAS pain: P= 1.000, ODI: P> .602, Barthel: P> .252, EQ-5D 5L index value: P> .610, VAS-EQ-5D 5L: P= 1.000). The inpatient complication rate was 8% after conservative and 16% after surgical treatment. During follow-up period 14% of conservatively treated patients and 3% of surgical treated patients experienced neurological deficits.Conclusions Conservative therapy of OF 4 injuries seems to be viable option in patients with only moderate symptoms. Hybrid stabilization was the dominant treatment strategy leading to promising clinical short-term results. Stand-alone cement augmentation seems to be a valid alternative in selected cases.

Study Design Subgroup analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort studyObjective To analyse surgical strategies applied to osteoporotic thoracolumbar osteoporotic fracture (OF) 5 injuries with anterior or posterior tension band failure and to assess related complications and clinical outcome.Methods A multicenter prospective cohort study (EOFTT) was conducted at 17 spine centers including 518 consecutive patients who were treated for an osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF). For the present study, only patients with OF 5 fractures were analysed. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI), Timed Up & Go test (TUG), EQ-5D 5L, and Barthel Index.Results In total, 19 patients (78 ± 7 years, 13 female) were analysed. Operative treatment consisted of long-segment posterior instrumentation in 9 cases and short-segment posterior instrumentation in 10 cases. Pedicle screws were augmented in 68 %, augmentation of the fractured vertebra was performed in 42%, and additional anterior reconstruction was done in 21 %. Two patients (11 %) received short-segment posterior instrumentation without either anterior reconstruction or cement-augmentation of the fractured vertebra. No surgical or major complications occurred, but general postoperative complications were observed in 45%. At a follow-up of mean 20 ± 10 weeks (range, 12 to 48 weeks), patients showed significant improvements in all functional outcome parameters.Conclusions In this analysis of patients with type OF 5 fractures, surgical stabilization was the treatment of choice and lead to significant short-term improvement in terms of functional outcome and quality of life despite a high general complication rate.

Study Design Systematic review/expert consensus.Objectives Fractures of the axis represent the most frequent injury of the spine in elderly patients. Both, operative and non-operative treatment are associated with a high rate of complications and mortality. The aim of this article was to summarize the current literature on the management of odontoid fractures in geriatric patients and to weigh it based on an expert consensus process.Methods In a joint consensus process, members of the Spine Section of the German Orthopaedic and Trauma Society (DGOU) aimed to formulate recommendations for the diagnostic workup and treatment of odontoid fractures in geriatric patients. Based on the previously published recommendations, this article is an updated version with incorporating a systematic review of the recent literature.Results Based on the new data available, the recommendations established in the initial consensus process were adapted.Conclusions Computed tomography represents the diagnostic standard for patients with suspected injuries of the upper cervical spine. Anderson/D’Alonzo odontoid fractures type 1, non-displaced type 2, and type 3 can be treated conservatively. Even non-unions do not necessarily result in poor clinical outcome. In Anderson/D’Alonzo type 2 fractures, surgical therapy offers the advantage of relatively safe osseous healing with no increased complication rate even in elderly patients and can thus be recommended. In very high aged patients, however, a case-by-case decision should be made. When surgical stabilization of osteoporotic odontoid fractures is indicated, posterior techniques are biomechanically advantageous and can be considered the standard.

Study Design Multicenter prospective cohort study.Objective The study aims to validate the recently developed OF score for treatment decisions in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF).Methods This is a prospective multicenter cohort study (EOFTT) in 17 spine centers. All consecutive patients with OVCF were included. The decision for conservative or surgical therapy was made by the treating physician independent of the OF score recommendation. Final decisions were compared to the recommendations given by the OF score. Outcome parameters were complications, Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Timed Up & Go test, EQ-5D 5 L, and Barthel Index.Results In total, 518 patients (75.3% female, age 75 ± 10) years were included. 344 (66%) patients received surgical treatment. 71% of patients were treated following the score recommendations. For an OF score cut-off value of 6.5, the sensitivity and specificity to predict actual treatment were 60% and 68% (AUC .684, P< .001). During hospitalization overall 76 (14.7%) complications occurred. The mean follow-up rate and time were 92% and 5 ± 3.5 months, respectively. While all patients in the study cohort improved in clinical outcome parameters, the effect size was significantly less in the patients not treated in line with the OF score’s recommendation. Eight (3%) patients needed revision surgery.Conclusions Patients treated according to the OF score’s recommendations showed favorable short-term clinical results. Noncompliance with the score resulted in more pain and impaired functional outcome and quality of life. The OF score is a reliable and save tool to aid treatment decision in OVCF.

Study Design: Prospective clinical cohort study (data collection); expert opinion (recommendation development).Objectives: Treatment options for nonsurgical and surgical management of osteoporotic vertebral body fractures are widely differing. Based on current literature, the knowledge of the experts, and their classification for osteoporotic fractures (OF classification) the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma has now introduced general treatment recommendations.Methods: a total of 707 clinical cases from 16 hospitals were evaluated. An OF classification–based score was developed to guide in the option of nonsurgical versus surgical management. For every classification type, differentiated treatment recommendations were deduced. Diagnostic prerequisites for reproducible treatment recommendations were defined: conventional X-rays with consecutive follow-up images (standing position whenever possible), magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography scan. OF classification allows for upgrading of fracture severity during the course of radiographic follow-up. The actual classification type is decisive for the score.Results: A score of less than 6 points advocates nonsurgical management; more than 6 points recommend surgical management. The primary goal of treatment is fast and painless mobilization. Because of expected comorbidities in this age group, minimally invasive procedures are being preferred. As a general rule, stability is more important than motion preservation. It is mandatory to restore the physiological loading capacity of the spine. If the patient was in a compensated unbalanced state at the time of fracture, reconstruction of the individual prefracture sagittal profile is sufficient. Instrumentation technique has to account for compromised bone quality. We recommend the use of cement augmentation or high purchase screws. The particular situations of injuries with neurological impairment; necessity to fuse; multiple level fractures; consecutive and adjacent fractures; fractures in ankylosing spondylitis are being addressed separately.Conclusions: The therapeutic recommendations presented here provide a reliable and reproducible basis to decide for treatment choices available. However, intermediate clinical situations remain with a score of 6 points allowing for both nonsurgical and surgical options. As a result, individualized treatment decisions may still be necessary. In the next step, the recommendations presented will be further evaluated in a multicenter controlled clinical trial.

Study Design: Narrative review.Objective: To establish recommendations for the treatment of odontoid fractures based on current literature and the knowledge of the experts of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).Methods: Narrative review of the literature. Analyzing treatment algorithms of German trauma and spine centers as members of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).Results: There are many influencing factors leading to appropriate treatment of odontoid fractures such as age, bone quality, arthrosis, classification, and type of the fracture. Conservative nonoperative treatment is appropriate for stable undislocated displaced odontoid fractures. Anterior osteosynthesis with 1 or 2 screws leads to good results in the classical unstable type II odontoid fracture in patients with good bone quality. However, modifiers have been identified by the working group leading to higher complication and failure rates. For these cases, more stable constructs and/or posterior approaches are indicated.Conclusions: Operation seems to be standard treatment for odontoid fractures. However, in the aged population, conservative treatment should be considered as morbidity and mortality rise significantly in the group of >75 years. Conservative treatment may also be started within stable nondislocated fractures, but then regular controls have to be performed. If operation is indicated, many influencing factors have to be considered for appropriate approach and technique. The classification of Anderson and D’Alonzo is still standard. To create an adequate treatment algorithm, dislocation displacement and instability have to be identified. Stable odontoid fractures are treated conservatively non-operatively, but if so regular controls have to be performed. Unstable and/or dislocated displaced odontoid fractures are treated by anterior osteosynthesis with 1 or 2 screws. The technique is demanding and leads to elevated complication and failure rates if modifiers are apparent. In these cases, posterior instrumentation or fusion of C1 and C2 is favorable. In the aged population (>80 years), operative therapy is critical as postoperative morbidity complication and mortality rates rise significantly. As there is still some bias in the treatment algorithms, the working group recommends establishment of a prospective study to result in more objective statements.

Study Design: Expert opinion.Objectives: Osteoporotic vertebral fractures are of increasing medical importance. For an adequate treatment strategy, an easy and reliable classification is needed.Methods: The working group “Osteoporotic Fractures” of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU) has developed a classification system (OF classification) for osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures. The consensus decision followed an established pathway including review of the current literature.Results: The OF classification consists of 5 groups: OF 1, no vertebral deformation (vertebral edema); OF 2, deformation with no or minor (<1/5) involvement of the posterior wall; OF 3, deformation with distinct involvement (>1/5) of the posterior wall; OF 4, loss of integrity of the vertebral frame or vertebral body collapse or pincer-type fracture; OF 5, injuries with distraction or rotation. The interobserver reliability was substantial (κ = .63).Conclusions: The proposed OF classification is easy to use and provides superior clinical differentiation of the typical osteoporotic fracture morphologies.