Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporotic fractures: missed opportunities for osteoporosis diagnosis.

Joint replacement surgery is common in older adults, leading to increasing periprosthetic fracture (PPFx) occurrence. We reviewed all PPFx seen over a 4-year period at an academic hospital. Clinical osteoporosis could be diagnosed based on existing data in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx. Periprosthetic fractures are generally osteoporosis-related. PURPOSE: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFx) cause morbidity, mortality, and cost. This study's purpose was to describe osteoporosis-related data available at the time of PPFx. METHODS: The electronic medical record (EMR) of PPFx patients seen over 4 years in a university orthopedic practice were reviewed. Demographic data and osteoporosis relevant parameters were collected. Prior DXA studies were reviewed, and L1 Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements were performed on CT scans obtained within 2 years before PPFx. Clinical osteoporosis was defined as prior diagnosis, prescribed osteoporosis treatment, T-score ≤ - 2.5, HU ≤ 100, or prior fracture. RESULTS: Records of 156 PPFx patients (115 F/41 M), mean (SD) age 75.4 (11.9), were reviewed. Almost all 153/156 (98%) of these fractures were femoral. Falls caused 139 (89%); 12 (8%) were spontaneous. Mean time post-arthroplasty was 7.9 (6.3) years. Prior fragility fracture(s) occurred in 72 (46%); 14 were PPFx. Osteoporosis was previously diagnosed in 45 (29%) and medications prescribed in 41 (26%). Prior to PPFx, DXA data were available in 62, mean (SD) lowest T-score was - 1.9 (0.9) and was ≤ - 2.5 in 19. CT data were available in 46; mean (SD) L1 HU was 79.0 (29.4) and was ≤ 100 in 35. Based on existing data, clinical osteoporosis could have been diagnosed in 104 (67%) at the time of PPFx. CONCLUSION: Periprosthetic fractures are osteoporosis-related. They occur in older adults, often female, and result from falls; BMD, when assessed, is low. Data available at the time of PPFx often allows osteoporosis diagnosis; this should prompt evaluation and pharmacologic treatment consideration.

Opportunistic CT-Based Hounsfield Units Strongly Correlate with Biomechanical CT Measurements in the Thoracolumbar Spine.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Hounsfield units (HUs) are known to correlate with clinical outcomes, no study has evaluated how they correlate with BCT and DXA measurements. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND: Low bone mineral density (BMD) represents a major risk factor for fracture and poor outcomes following spine surgery. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) can provide regional BMD measurements but has limitations. Opportunistic HUs provide targeted BMD estimates; however, they are not formally accepted for diagnosing osteoporosis in current guidelines. More recently, biomechanical computed tomography (BCT) analysis has emerged as a new modality endorsed by the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) for assessing bone strength. METHODS: Consecutive cases from 2017-2022 at a single institution were reviewed for patients who underwent BCT in the thoracolumbar spine. BCT-measured vertebral strength, trabecular BMD, and the corresponding American College of Radiology (ACR) Classification were recorded. DXA studies within three months of the BCT were reviewed. Pearson Correlation Coefficients were calculated, and receiver-operating characteristic curves were constructed to assess the predictive capacity of HUs. Threshold analysis was performed to identify optimal HU values for identifying osteoporosis and low BMD. RESULTS: Correlation analysis of 114 cases revealed a strong relationship between HUs and BCT vertebral strength (r=0.69; P<0.0001; R2=0.47) and trabecular BMD (r=0.76; P<0.0001; R2=0.58). However, DXA poorly correlated with opportunistic HUs and BCT measurements. HUs accurately predicted osteoporosis and low BMD (Osteoporosis: C=0.95, 95% CI 0.89-1.00; Low BMD: C=0.87, 95% CI 0.79-0.96). Threshold analysis revealed that 106 and 122 HUs represent optimal thresholds for detecting osteoporosis and low BMD. CONCLUSION: Opportunistic HUs strongly correlated with BCT-based measures, while neither correlated strongly with DXA-based BMD measures in the thoracolumbar spine. HUs are easy to perform at no additional cost and provide accurate BMD estimates at non-instrumented vertebral levels across all ACR-designated BMD categories.

MRI-based vertebral bone quality score: relationship with age and reproducibility.

Vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score is an opportunistic measure of bone mineral density using routine preoperative MRI in spine surgery. VBQ score positively correlates with age and is reproducible across serial scans. However, extrinsic factors, including MRI machine and protocol, affect the VBQ score and must be standardized. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to determine whether VBQ score increased with age and whether VBQ remained consistent across serial MRI studies obtained within 3 months. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated 136 patients, age 20-69, who received two T1-weighted lumbar MRI within 3 months of each other between January 2011 and December 2021. VBQ(L1-4) score was calculated as the quotient of L1-L4 signal intensity (SI) and L3 cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) SI. VBQ(L1) score was calculated as the quotient of L1 SI and L1 CSF SI. Regression analysis was performed to determine correlation of VBQ(L1-4) score with age. Coefficient of variation (CV) was used to determine reproducibility between VBQ(L1-4) scores from serial MRI scans. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six patients (mean ± SD age 44.9 ± 12.5 years; 53.7% female) were included in this study. Extrinsic factors affecting the VBQ score included patient age, MRI relaxation time, and specific MRI machine. When controlling for MRI relaxation/echo time, the VBQ(L1-4) score was positively correlated with age and had excellent reproducibility in serial MRI with CV of 0.169. There was excellent agreement (ICC > 0.9) of VBQ scores derived from the two formulas, VBQ(L1) and VBQ(L1-4). CONCLUSION: Extrinsic factors, including MRI technical factors and age, can impact the VBQ(L1-4) score and must be considered when using this tool to estimate bone mineral density (BMD). VBQ(L1-4) score was positively correlated with age. Reproducibility of the VBQ(L1-4) score across serial MRI is excellent especially when controlling for technical factors, supporting use of the VBQ score in estimating BMD. The VBQ(L1) score was a reliable alternative to the VBQ(L1-4) score.

Advances in Osteoporosis Therapy: Focus on Osteoanabolic Agents, Secondary Fracture Prevention, and Perioperative Bone Health.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes recently published data and other developments around osteoanabolic osteoporosis therapies in patients with very high fracture risk, including those undergoing bone-related surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Two osteoanabolic agents, abaloparatide and romosozumab, were recently approved for treatment of patients with osteoporosis at high fracture risk. These agents, along with teriparatide, are valuable for primary and secondary fracture prevention. Orthopedic surgeons are well positioned to facilitate secondary fracture prevention via referrals to fracture liaison services or other bone health specialist colleagues. This review aims to help surgeons understand how to identify patients with sufficiently high fracture risk to warrant consideration of osteoanabolic therapy. Recent evidence around the perioperative use and potential benefits of osteoanabolic agents in fracture healing and other orthopedic settings (e.g., spinal fusion and arthroplasty) in individuals with osteoporosis is also discussed. Osteoanabolic agents should be considered for patients with osteoporosis at very high fracture risk, including those with prior osteoporotic fractures and those with poor bone health who are undergoing bone-related surgery.

Bone Health Optimization (BHO) in Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. OBJECTIVE: To educate spine surgeons on the importance of bone health optimization in surgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Osteoporosis is common and underdiagnosed in spine surgery patients. Poor bone health has been linked to worse outcomes and complications after spine surgery. Guidelines are available to inform decision making on screening and treatment in this population. METHODS: Available literature is reviewed regarding bone health screening and treatment. Studies reporting outcomes related to osteoporosis, bone density, and vitamin D status are summarized. Pharmacologic treatment and nutritional considerations are discussed. Bone health optimization practice models and outcomes are also reviewed. RESULTS: Bone health screening should be considered in all adults over age 50. Gender-specific guidelines are available to determine which patients need dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Osteoporosis can be diagnosed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry T-score, fracture risk calculator or by history of low-energy fracture. Advanced imaging including computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging can be used to opportunistically assess bone health. If diagnosed, osteoporosis can be treated with either antiresorptive or anabolic agents. These medications can be started preoperatively or postoperatively and, in high-risk patients, surgical delay can be considered. The implementation of bone health optimization programs has been shown to greatly increasing screening and treatment rates. CONCLUSION: Bone health assessment and optimization are important for decreasing surgical risks and improving outcomes in spine surgery patients.

CT required to perform robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty can identify previously undiagnosed osteoporosis and guide femoral fixation strategy.

Osteoporosis can determine surgical strategy for total hip arthroplasty (THA), and perioperative fracture risk. The aims of this study were to use hip CT to measure femoral bone mineral density (BMD) using CT X-ray absorptiometry (CTXA), determine if systematic evaluation of preoperative femoral BMD with CTXA would improve identification of osteopenia and osteoporosis compared with available preoperative dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) analysis, and determine if improved recognition of low BMD would affect the use of cemented stem fixation. Retrospective chart review of a single-surgeon database identified 78 patients with CTXA performed prior to robotic-assisted THA (raTHA) (Group 1). Group 1 was age- and sex-matched to 78 raTHAs that had a preoperative hip CT but did not have CTXA analysis (Group 2). Clinical demographics, femoral fixation method, CTXA, and DXA data were recorded. Demographic data were similar for both groups. Preoperative femoral BMD was available for 100% of Group 1 patients (CTXA) and 43.6% of Group 2 patients (DXA). CTXA analysis for all Group 1 patients preoperatively identified 13 osteopenic and eight osteoporotic patients for whom there were no available preoperative DXA data. Cemented stem fixation was used with higher frequency in Group 1 versus Group 2 (28.2% vs 14.3%, respectively; p = 0.030), and in all cases where osteoporosis was diagnosed, irrespective of technique (DXA or CTXA). Preoperative hip CT scans which are routinely obtained prior to raTHA can determine bone health, and thus guide femoral fixation strategy. Systematic preoperative evaluation with CTXA resulted in increased recognition of osteopenia and osteoporosis, and contributed to increased use of cemented femoral fixation compared with routine clinical care; in this small study, however, it did not impact short-term periprosthetic fracture risk.

Fracture in Patients with Normal Bone Mineral Density: An Evaluation of the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone Registry.

BACKGROUND: Fractures often occur in patients with normal dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-measured bone mineral density (BMD). DXA does not consider clinical fracture risk factors or bone quality. We hypothesized that patients with normal BMD who sustain a fracture have other characteristics suggesting abnormal bone and an elevated fracture risk requiring additional bone health evaluation and potential anti-osteoporotic treatment. METHODS: A total of 7,219 patients who were ≥50 years of age, had sustained a fracture from July 2016 to July 2021, and had DXA data in the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone (AOA OTB) registry were included in this study. The index and prior fracture site data were obtained. BMD status was classified by the World Health Organization T-score criteria. The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores with and without BMD were calculated in patients with normal BMD. An elevated risk was defined as a major osteoporotic fracture risk of ≥20% or a hip fracture risk of ≥3%. RESULTS: The mean patient age (and standard deviation) was 70.8 ± 9.71 years, 84% of patients were female, and 92% of patients were Caucasian. Normal BMD was present in 8.6% of patients. The index fracture was a major osteoporotic fracture in 68.6% of patients with normal BMD and 75.6% of patients with osteoporosis. The most common site for index and prior fractures other than major osteoporotic fractures was the foot and ankle; of patients with normal BMD, 13.9% had this as the most common index site and 17.4% had this as the most common prior site. The FRAX risk calculated without BMD was elevated in 72.9% of patients with normal BMD, and the FRAX risk calculated with BMD was elevated in 12.0% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with a fracture and normal BMD met indications, including a prior fracture or elevated FRAX risk, for anti-osteoporotic therapies. Most patients were Caucasian and therefore potentially had a higher baseline fracture risk. The FRAX risk calculated without BMD was elevated more often than the FRAX risk with BMD, implying that clinical risk factors, which highlight multiple opportunities for non-pharmacologic secondary fracture prevention, should be considered along with DXA. Fractures other than major osteoporotic fractures were more common in patients with normal BMD, suggesting that minor fractures in adults who are ≥50 years of age should be considered sentinel events warranting further evaluation. Surgeons must recognize that other important risk factors apart from BMD may help to guide further bone health evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Secondary Fracture Rate After Vertebral Osteoporotic Compression Fracture Is Decreased by Anti-Osteoporotic Medication but Not Increased by Cement Augmentation.

BACKGROUND: Painful vertebral osteoporotic compression fractures (OCFs) are often treated with cement augmentation, although controversies exist as to whether or not this increases the secondary fracture risk. Prevention of secondary fracture includes treatment of underlying osteoporosis. The purposes of this study were to determine (1) whether cement augmentation increases the rate of secondary fracture compared with nonoperative management, (2) whether anti-osteoporotic medications reduce the rate of secondary fracture, and (3) the rate of osteoporosis treatment with medications following vertebral OCF. METHODS: The PearlDiver database was queried for all patients with a diagnosis of OCF from 2015 to 2019. Patients were excluded if they were <50 years old, had a diagnosis of spinal neoplasm or infection, or underwent lumbar fusion in the perioperative period. Secondary fracture risk was assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, with kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, anti-osteoporotic medications, age, gender, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index as variables. RESULTS: A total of 36,145 patients were diagnosed with an OCF during the study period. Of those, 25,904 (71.7%) underwent nonoperative management and 10,241 (28.3%) underwent cement augmentation, including 1,556 who underwent vertebroplasty and 8,833 who underwent kyphoplasty. Patients who underwent nonoperative management had a secondary fracture rate of 21.8% following the initial OCF, compared with 14.5% in the vertebroplasty cohort and 18.5% in the kyphoplasty cohort, which was not a significant difference on multivariate analysis. In the entire cohort, 2,833 (7.8%) received anti-osteoporotic medications and 33,312 (92.2%) did not. The rate of secondary fracture was 10.1% in patients who received medications and 21.9% in those who did not, which was a significant difference on multivariate analysis (odds ratio = 1.23, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cement augmentation did not alter the rate of secondary fracture, whereas anti-osteoporotic medications significantly decreased the risk of subsequent OCF by 19%. Only 7.8% of patients received a prescription for an anti-osteoporotic medication following the initial OCF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Humeral BMD can be Measured With DXA and Is Lower in the Surgical Arm After Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: As arthroplasty leads to bone loss, we hypothesized that humeral bone mineral density (BMD) is lower after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in the operative versus non-operative arm. However, there is no clinical approach to measure humeral BMD with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The purposes of this pilot study were to develop DXA methodology to measure humerus BMD, propose humerus regions of interest (ROIs), compare TSA BMD to the non-operative arm, correlate humeral BMD with standard sites, and evaluate measurement reproducibility. METHODOLOGY: Thirty-eight adults 1-5 years post-TSA had standard clinical DXA scans plus full humerus scans using the atypical femur fracture feature; precision was assessed in a subset (n = 32). Six custom ROIs were used to measure BMD throughout the humerus. Radius and humeral BMD were compared between arms by paired t-test and correlated ipsilaterally using Pearson's Correlation. Custom ROI BMD precision was assessed using the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) advanced precision calculator. RESULTS: Study included 38 subjects (24M/14F), with mean (SD) age and time post-surgery of 69.6 (7.7) years and 2.5 (1.3) years respectively. BMD was lower (p < 0.01) at all custom humerus sites (3.8% to 8.2%) on the surgical side but not different at radius sites. Humeral BMD correlated positively with ipsilateral ultra-distal and 1/3 radius (r = 0.54 to 0.86; p < 0.05). Custom BMD precision (%CV) ranged from 6.0-16.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Humerus BMD can be measured using DXA and is lower in the TSA arm. Radius BMD correlated with humeral BMD but was not lower in the surgical arm. BMD precision was worse than usual clinical sites; use of software optimized for the femur is a notable limitation and likely contributes to suboptimal precision. Further study to assess the clinical utility of humeral BMD is needed. Automation and optimization of these measurements should improve precision.

A Novel Osteoporosis Screening Protocol to Identify Orthopedic Surgery Patients for Preoperative Bone Health Optimization.

Introduction: Osteoporosis is highly prevalent in elective orthopedic surgery. While preoperative bone health optimization decreases osteoporosis-related complications, there is an unmet need to establish who may benefit from preoperative dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). This study assesses a novel, simple screening protocol to identify orthopedic surgical patients for preoperative DXA. Materials/Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 628 patients undergoing total knee, hip, or shoulder arthroplasty or thoracolumbar spine fusion. Inclusion criteria were ≥40 years undergoing primary elective surgery. Screening criteria defining who should obtain DXA due to high osteoporosis risk included: female ≥65, male ≥70, fracture history when ≥50 years, or FRAX major osteoporotic fracture risk (without bone mineral density [BMD]-adjustments) ≥8.4%. Osteoporosis was defined by World Health Organization criteria [T-score ≤ -2.5], clinical National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) criteria [T-score ≤ -2.5, elevated BMD-adjusted FRAX risk, or prior hip/spine fracture], and modified clinical criteria [NOF criteria simplified to include any non-traumatic prior fracture and FRAX without BMD]. Results: The study included 100 TKAs, 100 THAs, 251 TSAs, and 177 spine fusions, average age 65.6 ± 9.8. DXA was available for 209 patients. Screening criteria recommending DXA was met by 362 patients. For those with DXA, screening sensitivity was .96 (CI: .78 to .99) and specificity was .19 (CI: .14 to .25) for identifying T-score osteoporosis. Similar sensitivity of .99 (CI: .91 to .99) and specificity of .61 (CI: .56 to .66) were found for modified clinical osteoporosis. For modified clinical osteoporosis, 192 patients with osteoporosis met criteria (true pos.), 1 patient with osteoporosis did not meet criteria (false neg.), 170 patients without osteoporosis met criteria (false pos.), and 265 patients without osteoporosis did not meet criteria (true neg.). Discussion/Conclusion: A simple screening protocol identifies orthopedic surgical candidates at risk of T-score or clinical osteoporosis for preoperative DXA with high sensitivity.

Clinical risk factor status in patients with vertebral fracture but normal bone mineral density.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Normal bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is present in approximately 10% of older adults with fracture. BMD alone does not evaluate bone quality or clinical risk factors, and therefore, may not adequately capture a patient's fracture risk. Thus, despite a normal DXA-measured BMD, the underlying bone may be abnormal, suggesting that further bone health evaluation, and potentially, pharmacologic treatment may be warranted. PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of normal BMD, clinical fracture risk factors, and quantitative risk of fracture using the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) in vertebral fracture patients with normal BMD enrolled in the Own the Bone registry, thus facilitating identification of those who meet criteria for anti-osteoporosis therapy. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, national registry-based cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE: From July 2016 to July 2021, 1,807 patients age ≥50 who sustained a vertebral fracture and had DXA data available from within 2 years prior to enrollment in the American Orthopaedic Association's Own the Bone (AOA OTB) registry were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: World Health Organization (WHO) DXA T-score based bone classification criteria; FRAX risk scores of major osteoporotic fracture or hip fracture. METHODS: Demographic data, prior fracture site, and clinical fracture risk factors were collected. BMD status was classified by the WHO T-score criteria: ≥ -1.0 normal, -1.1 to -2.4 osteopenia, and ≤ -2.5 osteoporosis, with low bone mass including either osteopenia or osteoporosis. In normal BMD patients, FRAX scores were calculated with and without BMD, with the treatment threshold defined as a major osteoporotic fracture risk ≥20% or hip fracture risk ≥3%. RESULTS: Mean±SD age was 72.0±9.7, 78.1% were female, and 92.4% were Caucasian. Normal BMD was present in 7.9%. Clinical fracture risk factors including alcohol use ≥3 units/day and history of ≥2 falls in the year prior to enrollment were more common in normal BMD (11.2% and 28%, respectively) compared to low bone mass patients (3.4% and 25.2%, respectively). A prior vertebral fracture had occurred in 49.5% with normal BMD compared to 45.8% with low bone mass, while a prior non-major osteoporotic fracture occurred in 28.9% and 29.3% of normal BMD and low bone mass patients, respectively. In normal BMD patients, either a prior fracture or FRAX risk with BMD meeting treatment thresholds was present in 85%. CONCLUSIONS: Clear indications for receipt of pharmacologic therapy, ie, prior fracture or elevated fracture risk, were present in most patients with vertebral fracture and normal BMD enrolled in the AOA OTB. Prior non-major osteoporotic fractures were common and may be useful indicators of underlying bone disease. Surgeons must recognize that other important risk factors apart from BMD may indicate poor bone health, and thus, help guide further bone health evaluation.

Effect of Bone Health Optimization on Osteoporosis Screening and Treatment Before Thoracolumbar Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoporosis is not rare in thoracolumbar spine fusion patients and may portend poorer surgical outcomes. Implementation of a bone health optimization (BHO) clinic improves osteoporosis screening and treatment in the total joint arthroplasty population. We hypothesize that preoperative osteoporosis is common, under-recognized, and undertreated in thoracolumbar fusion patients and that a BHO clinic will increase preoperative osteoporosis screening rates and pharmacologic osteoporosis treatment in this population. METHODS: This retrospective case series includes adults older than 30 years who underwent elective thoracolumbar spine fusion at a single tertiary care center before and after creation of a BHO referral clinic. Data collected included preoperative osteoporosis risk factors, prior dual-energy radiograph absorptiometry testing, and prior osteoporosis pharmacotherapy. Fracture risk was estimated using the fracture risk assessment tool with and without bone mineral density (BMD), and the US National Osteoporosis Foundation criteria for screening and treatment were applied. RESULTS: Ninety patients were included in the pre-BHO group; 53 patients met criteria for BMD measurement, but only 10 were tested within 2 years preoperatively. Sixteen patients (18%) met criteria for osteoporosis pharmacotherapy, but only 5 of the 16 (31%) received osteoporosis medication within 6 months of surgery. There were 87 patients in the post-BHO group, and 19 were referred to the BHO clinic. BMD measurement was done in 17 of the patients (89%) referred to the BHO clinic compared with 10% for those not referred. All patients (n = 7) referred to the BHO clinic meeting treatment criteria received treatment within 6 months before surgery, whereas only 25% of the patients not referred received treatment. DISCUSSION: Osteoporosis is not rare in adults undergoing thoracolumbar spine fusion with ∼13% to 18% meeting criteria for pharmacotherapy. Preoperative BHO referral increases screening and treatment.

A Multicenter Evaluation of the Feasibility, Patient/Provider Satisfaction, and Value of Virtual Spine Consultation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility, patient/provider satisfaction, and perceived value of telehealth spine consultation after rapid conversion from traditional in-office visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data were obtained for patients undergoing telehealth visits with spine surgeons in the first 3 weeks after government restriction of elective surgical care at 4 sites (March 23, 2020, to April 17, 2020). Demographic factors, technique-specific elements of the telehealth experience, provider confidence in diagnostic and therapeutic assessment, patient/surgeon satisfaction, and perceived value were collected. RESULTS: A total of 128 unique visits were analyzed. New (74 [58%]), preoperative (26 [20%]), and postoperative (28 [22%]) patients were assessed. A total of 116 (91%) visits had successful connection on the first attempt. Surgeons felt very confident 101 times (79%) when assessing diagnosis and 107 times (84%) when assessing treatment plan. The mean and median patient satisfaction was 89% and 94%, respectively. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for video over audio-only visits (P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction was not significantly different with patient age, location of chief complaint (cervical or thoracolumbar), or visit type (new, preoperative, or postoperative). Providers reported that 76% of the time they would choose to perform the visit again in telehealth format. Sixty percent of patients valued the visit cost as the same or slightly less than an in-office consultation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate the feasibility and high patient/provider satisfaction of virtual spine surgical consultation, and appropriate reimbursement and balanced regulation for spine telehealth care is essential to continue this existing work.

Own the Fall: AOA Critical Issues.

ABSTRACT: Falls are the most common cause of injury to older patients, resulting in >3 million emergency room visits per year and 290,000 hip fractures annually in the United States. Orthopaedic surgeons care for the majority of these patients; however, they are rarely involved in the assessment of fall risk and providing prevention strategies. Falls also occur perioperatively (e.g., in patients with arthritis and those undergoing arthroplasty). Preoperatively, up to 40% of patients awaiting joint arthroplasty sustain a fall, and 20% to 40% have a fall postoperatively. Risk factors for falls include intrinsic factors such as age and comorbidities that are not modifiable as well as extrinsic factors, including medication reconciliation, improvement in the environment, and the management of modifiable comorbidities that can be optimized. Simple in-office fall assessment tools are available that can be adapted for the orthopaedic practice and be used to identify patients who would benefit from rehabilitation. Orthopaedic surgeons should incorporate these strategies to improve care and to reduce fall risk and associated adverse events.

Teriparatide Treatment Increases Hounsfield Units in the Thoracic Spine, Lumbar Spine, Sacrum, and Ilium Out of Proportion to the Cervical Spine.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective chart review. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the effect of teriparatide on Hounsfield Units (HU) in the cervical spine, thoracic spine, lumbar spine, sacrum, and pelvis. Second, to correlate HU changes at each spinal level with bone mineral density (BMD) on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: HU represent a method to estimate BMD and can be used either separately or in conjunction with BMD from DXA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review included patients who had been treated with at least 6 months of teriparatide. HU were measured in the vertebral bodies of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbosacral spine and iliac crests. Lumbar and femoral neck BMD as measured on DXA was collected when available. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients were identified for analysis with an average age of 67 years who underwent a mean (±SD) of 22±8 months of teriparatide therapy. HU improvement in the cervical spine was 11% (P=0.19), 25% in the thoracic spine (P=0.002), 23% in the lumbar spine (P=0.027), 17% in the sacrum (P=0.11), and 29% in the iliac crests (P=0.09). Lumbar HU correlated better than cervical HU with BMD as measured on DXA. CONCLUSIONS: Teriparatide increased average HU in the thoracolumbar spine to a proportionally greater extent than the cervical spine. The cervical spine had a higher baseline starting HU than the thoracolumbar spine. Lumbar HU correlated better than cervical and thoracic HU with BMD as measured on DXA.

Osteoporosis: Recent Recommendations and Positions of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research and the International Society for Clinical Densitometry.

➤: Osteoporosis is common in orthopaedic patients, not only in those sustaining fragility fractures but also in patients ≥50 years old who are having elective orthopaedic surgery. ➤: The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) has developed consensus-based recommendations for secondary fracture prevention for all patients who are ≥65 years old with a hip or spine fracture. ➤: The ASBMR encourages orthopaedic surgeons to "Own the Bone," by beginning prevention of a secondary fracture during hospitalization for a fragility fracture, if practicable, and arranging follow-up for continued bone health care after discharge. ➤: The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) recognized that many poor outcomes and complications of elective orthopaedic surgery are related to osteoporosis. ➤: The ISCD used an evidence-based approach to create official positions to identify which patients ≥50 years old who are having elective orthopaedic surgery should undergo assessment of bone health and how this should be performed.

Rationale for Bone Health Optimization in Patients Undergoing Orthopaedic Surgery.

Osteoporosis is common, affecting more than 40 million people, and is associated with increased fracture risk, loss of independence, chronic pain, and disability. Osteoporosis is underdiagnosed and undertreated even after fracture where secondary fracture prevention has been shown to be cost effective in reducing further fracture risk and mortality. Osteoporosis is also undiagnosed in patients undergoing orthopaedic and spine surgery in up to one-third of cases and negatively affects outcomes, need for revision surgery, and risk of complications. The diagnosis of osteoporosis was previously based on bone mineral density; however, recent clinical definitions include T-scores less than -2.5, the presence of hip and spine fractures, and high fracture risk. Surgeons should adopt bone health optimization for elective surgery. This program screens patients to determine whether a bone mineral density test is indicated and provides counseling for nutritional supplements, elimination of toxins, fall risk assessment, and education regarding bone health. Following assessment, patients meeting the criteria for osteoporosis are referred to a bone health specialist or a fracture liaison program. Both antiresorptive and anabolic antiosteoporotic medications appear effective at improving outcomes and reducing complications of orthopaedic and spine surgery, although a delay in surgery may be required.

Osteoporosis in spine surgery patients: what is the best way to diagnose osteoporosis in this population?

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare different recognized definitions of osteoporosis in patients with degenerative lumbar spine pathology undergoing elective spinal fusion surgery to determine which patient population should be considered for preoperative optimization. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients in whom lumbar spine surgery was planned at 2 academic medical centers was performed, and the rate of osteoporosis was compared based on different recognized definitions. Assessments were made based on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), CT Hounsfield units (HU), trabecular bone score (TBS), and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX). The rate of osteoporosis was compared based on different definitions: 1) the WHO definition (T-score ≤ -2.5) at total hip or spine; 2) CT HU of < 110; 3) National Bone Health Alliance (NBHA) guidelines; and 4) "expanded spine" criteria, which includes patients meeting NBHA criteria and/or HU < 110, and/or "degraded" TBS in the setting of an osteopenic T-score. Inclusion criteria were adult patients with a DXA scan of the total hip and/or spine performed within 1 year and a lumbar spine CT scan within 6 months of the physician visit. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four patients were included. The mean age was 68.3 years, with 70.5% female, 96.7% Caucasian, and the mean BMI was 28.8. Fracture history was reported in 53.8% of patients. The proportion of patients identified with osteoporosis on DXA, HUs, NBHA guidelines, and the authors' proposed "expanded spine" criteria was 25.4%, 36.5%, 75%, and 81.9%, respectively. Of the patients not identified with osteoporosis on DXA, 31.3% had osteoporosis based on HU, 55.1% had osteoporosis with NBHA, and 70.4% had osteoporosis with expanded spine criteria (p < 0.05), with poor correlations among the different assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Limitations in the use of DXA T-scores alone to diagnose osteoporosis in patients with lumbar spondylosis has prompted interest in additional methods of evaluating bone health in the spine, such as CT HU, TBS, and FRAX, to inform guidelines that aim to reduce fracture risk. However, no current osteoporosis assessment was developed with a focus on improving outcomes in spinal surgery. Therefore, the authors propose an expanded spine definition for osteoporosis to identify a more comprehensive cohort of patients with potential poor bone health who could be considered for preoperative optimization, although further study is needed to validate these results in terms of clinical outcomes.