1
|
Gewiess J, Albers CE, Keel MJB, Frihagen F, Rommens PM, Bastian JD. Chronic pelvic insufficiency fractures and their treatment. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2024; 145:76. [PMID: 39708227 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05717-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2024] [Accepted: 12/01/2024] [Indexed: 12/23/2024]
Abstract
Fragility and insufficiency fractures of the pelvis (FFP) and sacrum (SIF) are increasingly prevalent, particularly among the elderly, due to weakened bone structure and low-energy trauma. Chronic instability from these fractures causes persistent pain, limited mobility, and significant reductions in quality of life. Hospitalization is often required, with substantial risks of loss of independence (64-89%) and high mortality rates (13-27%). While conservative treatment is possible, surgical intervention is preferred for unstable or progressive fractures. FFP and SIF are primarily associated with osteoporosis, with 71% of patients not receiving adequate secondary fracture prevention. Imaging modalities play a crucial role in diagnosis. Conventional radiography often misses sacral fractures, while computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for evaluating fracture morphology. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers the highest sensitivity (99%), essential for detecting complex fractures and assessing bone edema. Advanced techniques like dual-energy CT and SPECT/CT provide further diagnostic value. Rommens and Hofmann's classification system categorizes FFP based on anterior and posterior pelvic ring involvement, guiding treatment strategies. Progression from stable fractures (FFP I-II) to highly unstable patterns (FFP IV) is common and influenced by factors like pelvic morphology, bone density, and sarcopenia. Treatment varies based on fracture type and stability. Non-displaced posterior fractures can be managed with sacroplasty or screw fixation, while displaced or unstable patterns often require more invasive methods, such as triangular lumbopelvic fixation or transsacral bar osteosynthesis. Sacroplasty provides significant pain relief but has limited stabilizing capacity, while screw augmentation with polymethylmethacrylate improves fixation in osteoporotic bones. Anterior ring fractures may be treated with retrograde transpubic screws or symphyseal plating, with biomechanical stability and long-term outcomes depending on fixation techniques. FFP and SIF management requires a multidisciplinary approach to ensure stability, pain relief, and functional recovery, emphasizing early diagnosis, tailored surgical strategies, and secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jan Gewiess
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
| | - Christoph Emanuel Albers
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Marius Johann Baptist Keel
- Spine-pelvis AG, Medical School, University of Zurich, Trauma Center Hirslanden, Clinic Hirslanden, Witellikerstrasse 40, CH-8032, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Frede Frihagen
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Østfold Hospital Trust, Grålum, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Pol Maria Rommens
- Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Johannes Dominik Bastian
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Charalampopoulos G, Bale R, Filippiadis D, Odisio BC, Wood B, Solbiati L. Navigation and Robotics in Interventional Oncology: Current Status and Future Roadmap. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 14:98. [PMID: 38201407 PMCID: PMC10795729 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14010098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2023] [Revised: 12/26/2023] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Interventional oncology (IO) is the field of Interventional Radiology that provides minimally invasive procedures under imaging guidance for the diagnosis and treatment of malignant tumors. Sophisticated devices can be utilized to increase standardization, accuracy, outcomes, and "repeatability" in performing percutaneous Interventional Oncology techniques. These technologies can reduce variability, reduce human error, and outperform human hand-to-eye coordination and spatial relations, thus potentially normalizing an otherwise broad diversity of IO techniques, impacting simulation, training, navigation, outcomes, and performance, as well as verification of desired minimum ablation margin or other measures of successful procedures. Stereotactic navigation and robotic systems may yield specific advantages, such as the potential to reduce procedure duration and ionizing radiation exposure during the procedure and, at the same time, increase accuracy. Enhanced accuracy, in turn, is linked to improved outcomes in many clinical scenarios. The present review focuses on the current role of percutaneous navigation systems and robotics in diagnostic and therapeutic Interventional Oncology procedures. The currently available alternatives are presented, including their potential impact on clinical practice as reflected in the peer-reviewed medical literature. A review of such data may inform wiser investment of time and resources toward the most impactful IR/IO applications of robotics and navigation to both standardize and address unmet clinical needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgios Charalampopoulos
- 2nd Department of Radiology, University General Hospital “ATTIKON”, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 1 Rimini Str, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Reto Bale
- Interventional Oncology/Stereotaxy and Robotics, Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria;
| | - Dimitrios Filippiadis
- 2nd Department of Radiology, University General Hospital “ATTIKON”, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 1 Rimini Str, 12462 Athens, Greece;
| | - Bruno C. Odisio
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA;
| | - Bradford Wood
- Interventional Radiology and Center for Interventional Oncology, NIH Clinical Center and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA;
| | - Luigi Solbiati
- Department of Radiology, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano (Milano), Italy and Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele (Milano), 20072 Milano, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sorensen AM, Zlevor AM, Kisting MA, Couillard AB, Ziemlewicz TJ, Toia GV, Hinshaw JL, Woods M, Stratchko LM, Pickhardt PJ, Foltz ML, Peppler WW, Lee FT, Knavel Koepsel EM. CT Navigation for Percutaneous Needle Placement: How I Do It. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2023; 26:100911. [PMID: 38071032 DOI: 10.1016/j.tvir.2023.100911] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2023]
Abstract
CT navigation (CTN) has recently been developed to combine many of the advantages of conventional CT and CT-fluoroscopic guidance for needle placement. CTN systems display real-time needle position superimposed on a CT dataset. This is accomplished by placing electromagnetic (EM) or optical transmitters/sensors on the patient and needle, combined with fiducials placed within the scan field to superimpose a known needle location onto a CT dataset. Advantages of CTN include real-time needle tracking using a contemporaneous CT dataset with the patient in the treatment position, reduced radiation to the physician, facilitation of procedures outside the gantry plane, fewer helical scans during needle placement, and needle guidance based on diagnostic-quality CT datasets. Limitations include the display of a virtual (vs actual) needle position, which can be inaccurate if the needle bends, the fiducial moves, or patient movement occurs between scans, and limitations in anatomical regions with a high degree of motion such as the lung bases. This review summarizes recently introduced CTN technologies in comparison to historical methods of CT needle guidance. A "How I do it" section follows, which describes how CT navigation has been integrated into the study center for both routine and challenging procedures, and includes step-by-step explanations, technical tips, and pitfalls.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna M Sorensen
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | - Annie M Zlevor
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | | | | | | | - Giuseppe V Toia
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | - J Louis Hinshaw
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Departments of Urology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | - Michael Woods
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | | | | | - Marcia L Foltz
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | | | - Fred T Lee
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Departments of Urology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
| | | |
Collapse
|