Functional Outcome With Percutaneous Ilio-sacral Screw Fixation For Posterior Pelvic Ring Injuries In Patients Involved In Heavy Manual Laboring

Long-Term Follow-Up after Iliosacral Screw Fixation of Unstable Pelvic Ring Fractures

(1) Background: High-energy injuries of the pelvic ring are rare. The wide application of iliosacral screw fixation of the posterior pelvic ring is relatively new. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term quality of life. (2) Methods: All patients treated with an iliosacral screw for a posterior pelvic ring stabilization after high-energy trauma at a level 1 trauma center between 2005 and 2015 were included. Pelvic ring injuries were classified according to the Tile classification adapted by AO/ASIF. The clinical evaluation included the patient-oriented questionnaires surveys of the Majeed Score, Iowa Pelvic Score (IPS), Work Ability Index (WAI), SF-36, EQ5D-5L. (3) Results: A total of 84 patients were included with a median follow-up of 130.1 months (IQR 95.0-162.0 months). The median ISS was 22.5 (IQR 16.0-29.0), mean Majeed Score 83.32 (SD ± 19.26), IPS 77.88 (SD ± 13.96), WAI 32.71 (SD ± 11.31), SF-36 PF 71.25 (SD ± 29.61) and EQ5D-5L 0.83 (SD ± 0.21). There was a notably difference between uni- and bilateral pelvic fractures (p = 0.033) as well as a correlation with the ISS (p = 0.043) with inferior functional outcome measured by IPS. (4) Conclusions: Long-term follow-up of iliosacral screw fixation of unstable pelvic ring fractures showed a good quality of life and functional outcome with equal EQ5D-5L results and inferior SF-36 physical functioning compared to the German population.

Complications of conventional percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation of traumatic pelvic ring injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to present a thorough overview of the complications associated with conventional percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation to identify areas for improvement in surgical technique and patient selection.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar were systematically searched for original human studies reporting on complications of conventional percutaneous sacroiliac fixation in traumatic pelvic ring injuries from January 1, 2000, to April 30, 2022. The main meta-analysis was based on the random effect model to pool all complications reported in the included studies. The results were reported as weighted proportions with 95% confidence intervals. This review was conducted in line with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 56 studies with 3644 screws (2871 procedures) met the inclusion criteria, with a mean age of 40.5 years. The most frequently reported complications were screw malposition with a weighted proportion of 6% (95% CI: 5-9%) and involved 189 out of 3644 screws, persistent pain following the procedure with a weighted proportion of 3% (95% CI: 2-4%) and affected 98 out of 2871 patients, and nerve injury, which had a weighted proportion of 2% (95% CI: 1-3%) and was observed in 41 out of 2871 procedures. The L5 and S1 nerve roots were more frequently affected. Revision surgery was required for 184 out of 2871 patients with a weighted proportion of 5% (95% CI: 3-7%). The primary reason for the revision was persistent pain after the initial procedure, which affected 74 out of 184 patients, with a weighted proportion of 2.0% (95% CI: 1.2-2.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that screw malposition, the need for revision surgery, persistent pain, and nerve injuries were the most frequent complications following conventional percutaneous sacroiliac screw fixation. However, these results must be interpreted in context due to confounding factors, including the lack of high-quality studies and the absence of uniformity in defining some complications across studies.

Patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injury: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Pelvic ring injuries are one of the most serious traumatic injuries with large consequences for the patients' daily life. During recent years, the importance of the patients' perception of their functioning and quality of life following injury has increasingly received attention. This systematic review reports on self-reported physical functioning and quality of life after all types of pelvic ring injuries.

METHODS

The online databases MEDLINE-PubMed and Ovid-EMBASE were searched for studies published between 2008 and 2019 to identify published evidence of patient-reported physical functioning and quality of life after which they were assessed for their methodological quality.

RESULTS

Of the 2577 articles, 46 were reviewed in full-text, including 3049 patients. Most studies were heterogeneous, with small cohorts of patients, a variety of injury types, treatment methods and use of different, often non-validated, outcome measures. The overall methodological quality was moderate to poor. Nine different PROMs were used, of which the Majeed Pelvic Score (MPS), SF-36 and EQ-5D were the most widely used. Mean scores respectively ranged from 75-95 (MPS), 53-69 (SF-36, physical functioning) and 0.63-0.80 (EQ-5D).

CONCLUSIONS

Physical functioning and quality of life following pelvic ring injuries seem fair and tend to improve during follow-up. However, differences in patient numbers, injury definition, treatment strategy, follow-up duration and type of PROMs used between studies hampers to elucidate the actual effects of pelvic ring injuries on a patient's life.

IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Physicians and researchers should use valid and reliable patient-reported outcome instruments on large cohorts of patients with properly defined injuries to truly evaluate physical functioning and quality of life after pelvic ring injuries.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews; registration number CRD42019129176.

Inaccuracies in the Use of the Majeed Pelvic Outcome Score: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the accuracy with which the Majeed Pelvic Score has been reported in the English literature.

DATA SOURCES

Databases used to search for literature were PubMed, Embase, and Ovid, restricted to English language from inception to October 2, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Search words used were: Majeed, pelvis, and outcome.

DATA EXTRACTION

Articles were assessed for descriptions of scoring and proper reporting of Majeed Pelvic Outcome Score.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Descriptive statistics were used to report the outcome of our findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Ninty-two English articles were identified. Twenty-four (26%) articles were identified as including methodology related to the use and scoring of the Majeed Pelvic score. The remaining 68 presented mean Majeed scores with no methodological information. None (0/92) discussed how the range of possible scores for the most severe function was applied. Six (7%) reported adjusted scores for patients not working. Three (3%) included a discussion of the scores as adjusted for patients working before injury compared with those not working. Ten (11%) addressed the categorization of scores by excellent to poor describing what raw scores defined those categories. We observed poor accuracy and notable inconsistency in the use and reporting of the Majeed Pelvic Outcome Score in the literature. These data demonstrate that interpretation and comparison of research reporting this score should be done cautiously. Future studies should include specific information as to how the Majeed instrument calculated to allow for verification of the presented scores and subsequent conclusions.