Search

UNLABELLED Antiresorptive medications do not negatively affect fracture healing in humans. Teriparatide may decrease time to fracture healing. Romosozumab has not shown a beneficial effect on human fracture healing. BACKGROUND Fracture healing is a complex process. Uncertainty exists over the influence of osteoporosis and the medications used to treat it on fracture healing. METHODS Narrative review authored by the members of the Fracture Working Group of the Committee of Scientific Advisors of the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF), on behalf of the IOF and the Société Internationale de Chirurgie Orthopédique et de Traumatologie (SICOT). RESULTS Fracture healing is a multistep process. Most fractures heal through a combination of intramembranous and endochondral ossification. Radiographic imaging is important for evaluating fracture healing and for detecting delayed or non-union. The presence of callus formation, bridging trabeculae, and a decrease in the size of the fracture line over time are indicative of healing. Imaging must be combined with clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes. Animal data support a negative effect of osteoporosis on fracture healing; however, clinical data do not appear to corroborate with this. Evidence does not support a delay in the initiation of antiresorptive therapy following acute fragility fractures. There is no reason for suspension of osteoporosis medication at the time of fracture if the person is already on treatment. Teriparatide treatment may shorten fracture healing time at certain sites such as distal radius; however, it does not prevent non-union or influence union rate. The positive effect on fracture healing that romosozumab has demonstrated in animals has not been observed in humans. CONCLUSION Overall, there appears to be no deleterious effect of osteoporosis medications on fracture healing. The benefit of treating osteoporosis and the urgent necessity to mitigate imminent refracture risk after a fr

Summary: In a cross-sectional analysis in postmenopausal women, prior ankle fractures were associated with lower areal bone mineral density (BMD) and trabecular bone alterations compared to no fracture history. Compared to women with forearm fractures, microstructure alterations were of lower magnitude. These data suggest that ankle fractures are another manifestation of bone fragility. Introduction: Whether ankle fractures represent fragility fractures associated with low areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) and/or bone microstructure alterations remains unclear, in contrast to the well-recognised association between forearm fractures and osteoporosis. The objective of this study was to investigate aBMD, vBMD and bone microstructure in postmenopausal women with prior ankle fracture in adulthood, compared with women without prior fracture or with women with prior forearm fractures, considered as typically of osteoporotic origin. Methods: In a cross-sectional analysis in the Geneva Retirees Cohort study, 63 women with ankle fracture and 59 with forearm fracture were compared to 433 women without fracture (mean age, 65 ± 1years). aBMD was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; distal radius and tibia vBMD and bone microstructure were measured by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Results: Compared with women without fracture, those with ankle fractures had lower aBMD, radius vBMD (−7.9%), trabecular density (−10.7%), number (−7.3%) and thickness (−4.6%) and higher trabecular spacing (+14.5%) (P < 0.05 for all). Tibia trabecular variables were also altered. For 1 standard deviation decrease in total hip aBMD or radius trabecular density, odds ratios for ankle fractures were 2.2 and 1.6, respectively, vs 2.2 and 2.7 for forearm fracture, respectively (P ≤ 0.001 for all). Compared to women with forearm fractures, those with ankle fractures had similar spine and hip aBMD, but microstructure alteratio

Summary: In this prospective 10-year study in elderly aged 60years and over, there was a 1.3% per year reduction in the standardized incidence of hip fracture in women but not in men. This decrease was mainly due to changes in the standardized incidence of hip fracture in institution-dwelling women. Introduction: A decrease in age-adjusted hip fracture incidence has been recently demonstrated in some countries. Since a large proportion of hip fractures occur in nursing homes, we analyzed whether this decreasing trend would be more detectable in institution-dwelling elderly compared with community-dwelling elderly. Methods: All hip fracture patients aged 60years and over were identified in a well-defined area. Incidence of hip fracture, age- and sex-adjusted to the 2000 Geneva population, was computed in community- and institution-dwelling elderly. Results: From 1991 to 2000, 1,624 (41%) hip fractures were recorded in institutionalized-dwelling elderly and 2,327 (59%) in community-dwelling elderly. The standardized fracture incidence decreased by 1.3% per year in women (p = 0.039), but remained unchanged in men (+0.5%; p = 0.686). Among institution-dwelling women, hip fracture incidence fell by 1.9% per year (p = 0.044), whereas it remained stable among community-dwelling women (+0.0%, p = 0.978). In men, no significant change in hip fracture incidence occurred among institution- or community-dwelling elderly. Conclusions: The decrease in the standardized hip fracture incidence in institution-dwelling women is responsible for the reversal in secular trend. Future research should include stratification according to the residential status to better identify the causes responsible for the trend in hip fracture incidence

Summary: We evaluated vertebral fracture prevalence using DXA-based vertebral fracture assessment and its influence on the Fracture Risk Assessment (FRAX) tool-determined 10-year fracture probability in a cohort of oldest old nursing home residents. More than one third of the subjects had prevalent vertebral fracture and 50% osteoporosis. Probably in relation with the prevailing influence of age and medical history of fracture, adding these information into FRAX did not markedly modify fracture probability. Introduction: Oldest old nursing home residents are at very high risk of fracture. The prevalence of vertebral fracture in this specific population and its influence on fracture probability using the FRAX tool are not known. Methods: Using a mobile DXA osteodensitometer, we studied the prevalence of vertebral fracture, as assessed by vertebral fracture assessment program, of osteoporosis and of sarcopenia in 151 nursing home residents. Ten-year fracture probability was calculated using appropriately calibrated FRAX tool. Results: Vertebral fractures were detected in 36% of oldest old nursing home residents (mean age, 85.9 ± 0.6years). The prevalence of osteoporosis and sarcopenia was 52% and 22%, respectively. Ten-year fracture probability as assessed by FRAX tool was 27% and 15% for major fracture and hip fracture, respectively. Adding BMD or VFA values did not significantly modify it. Conclusion: In oldest old nursing home residents, osteoporosis and vertebral fracture were frequently detected. Ten-year fracture probability appeared to be mainly determined by age and clinical risk factors obtained by medical history, rather than by BMD or vertebral fracture