RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of osteoporosis medications on opportunistic CT-based Hounsfield units (HU). METHODS: Spine and nonspine surgery patients were retrospectively identified who had been treated with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for 3 to 12 months, teriparatide for > 12 months, denosumab for > 12 months, or alendronate for > 12 months. HU were measured in the L1-4 vertebral bodies. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the mean change in HU among the five treatment regimens. RESULTS: In total, 318 patients (70% women) were included, with a mean age of 69 years and mean BMI of 27 kg/m2. There was a significant difference in mean HU improvement (p < 0.001) following treatment with romosozumab for 3 to 12 months (n = 32), teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (n = 30), teriparatide for > 12 months (n = 44), denosumab for > 12 months (n = 123), and alendronate for > 12 months (n = 100). Treatment with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months significantly increased the mean HU by 26%, from a baseline of 85 to 107 (p = 0.012). Patients treated with teriparatide for > 12 months (mean 23 months) experienced a mean HU improvement of 25%, from 106 to 132 (p = 0.039). Compared with the mean baseline HU, there was no significant difference after treatment with teriparatide for 3 to 12 months (110 to 119, p = 0.48), denosumab for > 12 months (105 to 107, p = 0.68), or alendronate for > 12 months (111 to 113, p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with romosozumab for a mean of 10.5 months and teriparatide for a mean of 23 months experienced improved spinal bone mineral density as estimated by CT-based opportunistic HU. Given the shorter duration of effective treatment, romosozumab may be the preferred medication for optimization of osteoporotic patients in preparation for elective spine fusion surgery.
RESUMEN
STUDY DESIGN: This is a systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) outcomes and complications as a function of preoperative bone mineral density (BMD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preoperative BMD optimization is commonly initiated before lumbar spinal fusion, but the effects of BMD on ACDF are less known. Consequently, it remains unclear whether preoperative BMD optimization is recommended before ACDF. METHODS: This systematic review included relevant clinical articles using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and MEDLINE from database inception until October 1, 2023. Eligible studies included those evaluating low BMD and outcomes after ACDF. All articles were graded using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scale and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) assessment tools. RESULTS: The initial retrieval yielded 4271 articles for which 4 articles with 671 patients were included in the final analysis. The mean patient age was 56.4 ± 3.9 years, and 331 patients (49.3%) were female. A total of 265 (39.5%) patients had low BMD (T score<-1.0) before ACDF. Preoperative low BMD was associated with cage subsidence in single-level ACDF (odds ratio (OR) 2.57; P=0.063; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.95-6.95), but this result did not reach statistical significance. Osteoporosis (T score<-2.5) was associated with the development of adjacent segment disease following ACDF (OR 4.41; P<0.01; 95% CI: 1.98-9.83). Low pre-operative BMD was associated with reoperation within 2 years (P<.05) and strongly associated with pseudarthrosis (OR: 11.01; P=0.002; 95% CI 2.4-49.9). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low BMD who undergo ACDF have higher rates of subsidence, adjacent segment disease, and pseudarthrosis than those with normal BMD. Given the individual and system-wide burdens associated with these complications, some patients may benefit from preoperative BMD screening and optimization before undergoing ACDF.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Most periprosthetic fractures following total hip arthroplasty (THA) are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses. However, it remains unknown how many patients were diagnosed who had osteoporosis before injury or received the proper evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment after injury. METHODS: We identified 171 Vancouver B2 (109) and B3 (62) periprosthetic femur fractures treated with a modular fluted tapered stem from 2000 to 2018 at 1 institution. The mean patient age was 75 years (range, 35 to 94), 50% were women, and the mean body mass index was 29 (range, 17 to 60). We identified patients who had osteoporosis or osteopenia diagnoses, a fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX), bone mineral density (BMD) testing, an endocrinology consult, and osteoporosis medications. Age-appropriate BMD testing was defined as no later than 1 year after the recommended ages of 65 (women) or 70 years (men). The mean follow-up was 11 years (range, 4 to 21). RESULTS: Falls from standing height caused 94% of fractures and thus, by definition, qualified as osteoporosis-defining events. The prevalence of osteoporosis diagnosis increased from 20% before periprosthetic fracture to 39% after (P < .001). The prevalence of osteopenia diagnosis increased from 13% before the fracture to 24% after (P < .001). The prevalence of either diagnosis increased from 24% before fracture to 44% after (P < .001). No patients had documented FRAX scores before fracture, and only 2% had scores after. The prevalence of BMD testing was 21% before fracture and 22% after (P = .88). By the end of the final follow-up, only 16% had received age-appropriate BMD testing. The proportion of patients who had endocrinology consults increased from 6% before the fracture to 25% after (P < .001). The proportion on bisphosphonate therapy was 19% before fracture and 25% after (P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Although most periprosthetic fractures following THA are fragility fractures that qualify patients for osteoporosis diagnoses, there remain major gaps in diagnosis, screening, endocrinology follow-up, and treatment. Like nonarthroplasty fragility fractures, a systematic approach is needed after periprosthetic fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Absorciometría de Fotón , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Fracturas Periprotésicas , Humanos , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/etiología , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Anciano , Fracturas Periprotésicas/diagnóstico , Fracturas Periprotésicas/etiología , Masculino , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/diagnóstico , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Densidad Ósea/fisiología , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Diagnóstico Erróneo/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de RodillaRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Vértebras Lumbares , Humanos , Femenino , Lactante , Preescolar , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Vértebras Lumbares/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Humanos , Densidad Ósea , Conservadores de la Densidad Ósea/uso terapéutico , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Osteoporosis/inducido químicamente , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/prevención & control , Teriparatido/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Osteoporosis , Adulto , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Osteoporosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Vitamina D , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
Total joint replacement is common and increasing. Many of these patients have low bone mineral density preoperatively, and arthroplasty leads to bone loss. As falls are common before and after arthroplasty, it is unsurprising that periprosthetic fractures, defined as those associated with an orthopedic device, whether a joint replacement or other internal fixation devices, are not rare. These fractures engender morbidity and mortality comparable to osteoporosis-related hip fractures but remain largely unrecognized and untreated by osteoporosis/metabolic bone disease clinicians. Indeed, recent osteoporosis guidelines are silent regarding periprosthetic fractures. The purposes of this clinical review are to briefly describe the epidemiology of arthroplasty procedures and periprosthetic fractures, raise awareness that these fractures are osteoporosis-related, and suggest approaches likely to reduce their occurrence. Notably, bone health evaluation is essential following the occurrence of a periprosthetic fracture to reduce subsequent fracture risk. Importantly, in addition to such secondary fracture prevention, primary prevention, i.e., bone health assessment and optimization prior to elective orthopedic procedures, is appropriate.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera , Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas , Fracturas del Fémur , Fracturas de Cadera , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Periprotésicas , Humanos , Fracturas Periprotésicas/epidemiología , Fracturas Periprotésicas/etiología , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera/efectos adversos , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/epidemiología , Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas/complicaciones , Fracturas de Cadera/cirugía , Fracturas del Fémur/cirugía , Fracturas del Fémur/complicacionesRESUMEN
This study evaluated the intraoperative physician assessment (IPA) of bone status at time of total knee arthroplasty. IPA was highly correlated with distal femur and overall bone mineral density. When IPA identifies poor bone status, formal bone health assessment is indicated. PURPOSE: Intuitively, intraoperative physician assessment (IPA) would be an excellent measure of bone status gained through haptic feedback during bone preparation. However, no studies have evaluated the orthopedic surgeon's ability to do so. This study's purpose, in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), was to relate IPA with (1) the lowest bone mineral density (BMD) T-score at routine clinical sites; and (2) with distal femur BMD. METHODS: Seventy patients undergoing TKA by 3 surgeons received pre-operative DXA. Intraoperatively, bone quality was assessed on a 5-point scale (1 excellent to 5 poor) based on tactile feedback to preparation. Demographic data, DXA results, and IPA score between surgeons were compared by factorial ANOVA. Lowest T-score and distal femur BMD were associated with IPA using Spearman's correlation. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age and BMI were 65.8 (7.6) years and 31.4 (5.1) kg/m2, respectively. Patient demographic data, BMD, and IPA (mean [SD] = 2.74 [1.2]) did not differ between surgeons. IPA correlated with the lowest T-score (R = 0.511) and distal femur BMD (R = 0.603-0.661). Based on the lowest T-score, no osteoporotic patients had an IPA above average, and none with normal BMD was classified as having poor bone. CONCLUSIONS: IPA is highly correlated with local (distal femur) and overall BMD. This study supports the International Society for Clinical Densitometry position that surgeon concern regarding bone quality should lead to bone health assessment. As IPA is comparable between surgeons, it is logical this can be widely applied by experienced orthopedic surgeons. Future studies evaluating IPA at other anatomic sites are indicated.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Médicos , Humanos , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Fémur/diagnóstico por imagen , Fémur/cirugía , Persona de Mediana Edad , AncianoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera , Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Periprotésicas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas Periprotésicas/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Ortopedia , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Masculino , Densidad Ósea , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/etiología , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/prevención & control , Medición de Riesgo , Absorciometría de Fotón , Factores de Riesgo , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMEN
This study evaluates a novel, simple bone health screening protocol composed of patient sex, age, fracture history, and FRAX risk to identify total knee arthroplasty patients for preoperative DXA. Findings supported effectiveness, with sensitivity of 1.00 (CI 0.92-1.00) and specificity of 0.54 (CI 0.41-0.68) when evaluating for clinical osteoporosis. PURPOSE: Bone health optimization is a process where osteoporotic patients are identified, evaluated via modalities such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and treated when indicated. There are currently no established guidelines to determine who needs presurgical DXA. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a simple screening protocol to identify TKA patients for preoperative DXA. METHODS: This prospective cohort study began on September 1, 2019, and included 100 elective TKA patients. Inclusion criteria were ≥ 50 years and primary TKA. All patients obtained routine clinical DXA. The screening protocol defining who should obtain DXA included meeting any of the following: female ≥ 65, male ≥ 70, fracture history after age 50, or FRAX major osteoporotic fracture risk without bone mineral density (BMD) adjustments ≥ 8.4%. Osteoporosis was defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria (T-score ≤ - 2.5) or clinically (T-score ≤ - 2.5, elevated BMD-adjusted FRAX risk, or prior hip/spine fracture). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: The study included 68 females and 32 males, mean age 67.2 ± 7.7. T-score osteoporosis was observed in 16 patients while 43 had clinical osteoporosis. Screening criteria recommending DXA was met by 69 patients. Screening sensitivity was 1.00 (CI 0.79-1.00) and specificity was 0.37 (CI 0.27-0.48) for identifying patients with T-score osteoporosis. Similar sensitivity of 1.00 (CI 0.92-1.00) and specificity of 0.54 (CI 0.41-0.68) were found for clinical osteoporosis. CONCLUSIONS: A simple screening protocol identifies TKA patients with T-score and clinical osteoporosis for preoperative DXA with high sensitivity in this prospective cohort study.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla , Fracturas de Cadera , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Densidad Ósea , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/efectos adversos , Estudios Prospectivos , Osteoporosis/diagnóstico , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/etiología , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/prevención & control , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Fracturas por Compresión , Cifoplastia , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral , Vertebroplastia , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Fracturas por Compresión/etiología , Fracturas por Compresión/cirugía , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/etiología , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/etiología , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/prevención & control , Osteoporosis/complicaciones , Osteoporosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Cementos para Huesos/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
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 (nâ¯=â¯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 (râ¯=â¯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.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastía de Reemplazo de Hombro , Densidad Ósea , Adulto , Humanos , Absorciometría de Fotón/métodos , Brazo , Húmero/diagnóstico por imagen , Proyectos Piloto , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Óseas Metabólicas , Fracturas de Cadera , Osteoporosis , Fracturas Osteoporóticas , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral , Absorciometría de Fotón , Anciano , Densidad Ósea , Preescolar , Femenino , Fracturas de Cadera/complicaciones , Humanos , Masculino , Osteoporosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas Osteoporóticas/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/complicaciones , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Fracturas de la Columna Vertebral/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
The use of metallic and polymeric materials for implants has been increasing over the past decade. This trend can be attributed to a variety of factors including a significant increase in basic science research focused on implant material characteristics and how various surface modifications may stimulate osseointegration and, ultimately, fusion. There are many interbody fusion devices and dental implants commercially available; however, detailed information about their surface properties, and the effects that various materials and surface modifications may have on osteogenesis, is lacking in the literature. While the concept of bone-implant osseointegration is a relatively recent addition to the spine fusion literature, there is a comparatively large body of literature related to dental implants. The purpose of this article is to summarize the science of surface modified bone-facing implants, focusing on biomimetic material chemistry and topography of titanium implants, to promote a better understanding of how these characteristics may impact bone formation and osseointegration. This manuscript has the following aspects: highlights the role of titanium and its alloys as potent osteoconductive bioactive materials; explores the importance of biomimetic surface topography at the macro-, micro- and nano-scale; summarizes how material surface design can influence osteogenesis and immune responses in vitro; focuses on the kinds of surface modifications that play a role in the process. Biomimetic surface modifications can be varied across many clinically available biomaterials, and the literature supports the hypothesis that those biomaterial surfaces that exhibit physical properties of bone resorption pits, such as roughness and complex hierarchical structures at the submicron and nanoscale, are more effective in supporting osteoblast differentiation in vitro and osteogenesis in vivo.
RESUMEN
The mission of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Center for Devices and Radiological Health is to protect and promote public health. It assures that patients and providers have timely and continued access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical devices and safe radiation-emitting products by providing meaningful and timely information about the products we regulate and the decisions we make. On September 17, 2021, an FDA workshop was held to provide information to stakeholders, including members of the spine community, device manufacturers, regulatory affairs professionals, clinicians, patients, and the general public regarding FDA regulations, guidance and regulatory pathways related to spinal device clinical review. It was not intended to communicate any new policies, processes, or interpretations regarding medical device marketing authorizations. This workshop consisted of individual presentations, group discussions, question and answer sessions, and audience surveys. Information-sharing included discussions related to patient-reported outcomes, clinician-reported outcomes, observer-reported outcomes, and performance outcomes. Discussions involving external subject matter experts covered topics related to spinal device clinical studies including definition of a target population, enrollment criteria, strategies for inclusion of under-represented patient groups, reporting of adverse event and secondary surgical procedures, clinical study endpoints, and clinical outcome assessments. A meeting transcript and webcast workshop link are currently posted on the FDA website. Important related issues and challenges were discussed, and an exciting range of new ideas and concepts were shared which hold promise to advance regulatory science, patient care and future innovation related to spinal devices.