Red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common presentation across different healthcare settings. Clinicians need to confidently be able to screen and identify people presenting with low back pain with a high suspicion of serious or specific pathology (e.g. vertebral fracture). Patients identified with an increased likelihood of having a serious pathology will likely require additional investigations and specific treatment. Guidelines recommend a thorough history and clinical assessment to screen for serious pathology as a cause of low back pain. However, the diagnostic accuracy of recommended red flags (e.g. older age, trauma, corticosteroid use) remains unclear, particularly those used to screen for vertebral fracture.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of red flags used to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. Where possible, we reported results of red flags separately for different types of vertebral fracture (i.e. acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, vertebral traumatic fracture, vertebral stress fracture, unspecified vertebral fracture).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 26 July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered primary diagnostic studies if they compared results of history taking or physical examination (or both) findings (index test) with a reference standard test (e.g. X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), single-photon emission computerised tomography (SPECT)) for the identification of vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. We included index tests that were presented individually or as part of a combination of tests.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data for diagnostic two-by-two tables from the publications or reconstructed them using information from relevant parameters to calculate sensitivity, specificity, and positive (+LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We extracted aspects of study design, characteristics of the population, index test, reference standard, and type of vertebral fracture. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of studies and index tests, therefore the analysis was descriptive. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and LRs for each test and used these as an indication of clinical usefulness. Two review authors independently conducted risk of bias and applicability assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool.

MAIN RESULTS

This review is an update of a previous Cochrane Review of red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. We included 14 studies in this review, six based in primary care, five in secondary care, and three in tertiary care. Four studies reported on 'osteoporotic vertebral fractures', two studies reported on 'vertebral compression fracture', one study reported on 'osteoporotic and traumatic vertebral fracture', two studies reported on 'vertebral stress fracture', and five studies reported on 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. Risk of bias was only rated as low in one study for the domains reference standard and flow and timing. The domain patient selection had three studies and the domain index test had six studies rated at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of the data. Results from single studies suggest only a small number of the red flags investigated may be informative. In the primary healthcare setting, results from single studies suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs (range: 1.93 to 12.85) for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 6.42, 95% CI 2.94 to 14.02). Results from single studies suggest 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for studies in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 70 years: 11.19, 95% CI 5.33 to 23.51). Results from single studies suggest 'corticosteroid use' may be an informative red flag in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR range: 3.97, 95% CI 0.20 to 79.15 to 48.50, 95% CI 11.48 to 204.98) and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.46, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.34); however, diagnostic values varied and CIs were imprecise. Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and female gender' in primary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (16.17, 95% CI 4.47 to 58.43). In the secondary healthcare setting, results from a single study suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.18, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.54) and 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 75 years: 2.51, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.27). Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and trauma' in secondary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 4.35, 95% CI 2.92 to 6.48). Results from a single study suggest when '4 of 5 tests' were positive in secondary care, they demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 9.62, 95% CI 5.88 to 15.73). In the tertiary care setting, results from a single study suggest 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture' (+LR: 31.09, 95% CI 18.25 to 52.96).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that only a few red flags are potentially useful in guiding clinical decisions to further investigate people suspected to have a vertebral fracture. Most red flags were not useful as screening tools to identify vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. In primary care, 'older age' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture', and 'trauma' and 'corticosteroid use' were both informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture'. In secondary care, 'older age' was informative for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' and 'trauma' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. In tertiary care, 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture'. Combinations of red flags were also informative and may be more useful than individual tests alone. Unfortunately, the challenge to provide clear guidance on which red flags should be used routinely in clinical practice remains. Further research with primary studies is needed to improve and consolidate our current recommendations for screening for vertebral fractures to guide clinical care.

Return to sport following low-risk and high-risk bone stress injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Bone stress injuries (BSIs) are classified in clinical practice as being at low- or high-risk for complication based on the injury location. However, this dichotomous approach has not been sufficiently validated. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the prognostic role of injury location on return-to-sport (RTS) and treatment complications after BSI of the lower extremity and pelvis.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google Scholar databases were searched from database inception to December 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Peer-reviewed studies that reported site-specific RTS of BSIs in athletes.

RESULTS

Seventy-six studies reporting on 2974 BSIs were included. Sixteen studies compared multiple injury sites, and most of these studies (n=11) described the anatomical site of injury as being prognostic for RTS or the rate of treatment complication. Pooled data revealed the longest time to RTS for BSIs of the tarsal navicular (127 days; 95% CI 102 to 151 days) and femoral neck (107 days; 95% CI 79 to 135 days) and shortest duration of time for BSIs of the posteromedial tibial shaft (44 days, 95% CI 27 to 61 days) and fibula (56 days; 95% CI 13 to 100 days). Overall, more than 90% of athletes successfully returned to sport. Treatment complication rate was highest in BSIs of the femoral neck, tarsal navicular, anterior tibial shaft and fifth metatarsal; and lowest in the fibula, pubic bone and posteromedial tibial shaft.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review supports that the anatomical site of BSIs influences RTS timelines and the risk of complication. BSIs of the femoral neck, anterior tibial shaft and tarsal navicular are associated with increased rates of complications and more challenging RTS.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021232351.

Ultrasound and shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

The morbidity and socioeconomic costs of fractures are considerable. The length of time to healing is an important factor in determining a person's recovery after a fracture. Ultrasound may have a therapeutic role in reducing the time to union after fracture by stimulating osteoblasts and other bone-forming proteins. This is an update of a review previously published in February 2014.   OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of low-intensity ultrasound (LIPUS), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFUS) and extracorporeal shockwave therapies (ECSW) as part of the treatment of acute fractures in adults.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase (1980 to March 2022), Orthopaedic Proceedings, trial registers and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs including participants over 18 years of age with acute fractures (complete or stress fractures) treated with either LIPUS, HIFUS or ECSW versus a control or placebo-control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We collected data for the following critical outcomes: participant-reported quality of life, quantitative functional improvement, time to return to normal activities, time to fracture union, pain, delayed or non-union of fracture. We also collected data for treatment-related adverse events. We collected data in the short term (up to three months after surgery) and in the medium term (later than three months after surgery).   MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 studies, involving 1543 fractures in 1517 participants; two studies were quasi-RCTs. Twenty studies tested LIPUS and one trial tested ECSW; no studies tested HIFUS. Four studies did not report any of the critical outcomes. All studies had unclear or high risk of bias in at least one domain. The certainty of the evidence was downgraded for imprecision, risk of bias and inconsistency. LIPUS versus control (20 studies, 1459 participants) We found very low-certainty evidence for the effect of LIPUS on Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by SF-36 at up to one year after surgery for lower limb fractures (mean difference (MD) 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.85 to 3.97, favours LIPUS; 3 studies, 393 participants). This result was compatible with a clinically important difference of 3 units with both LIPUS or control. There may be little to no difference in time to return to work after people had complete fractures of the upper or lower limbs (MD 1.96 days, 95% CI -2.13 to 6.04, favours control; 2 studies, 370 participants; low-certainty evidence).  There is probably little or no difference in delayed union or non-union up to 12 months after surgery (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.09, favours control; 7 studies, 746 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Although data for delayed and non-union included both upper and lower limbs, we noted that there were no incidences of delayed or non-union in upper limb fractures. We did not pool data for time to fracture union (11 studies, 887 participants; very low-certainty evidence) because of substantial statistical heterogeneity which we could not explain. In upper limb fractures, MDs ranged from 0.32 to 40 fewer days to fracture union with LIPUS. In lower limb fractures, MDs ranged from 88 fewer days to 30 more days to fracture union. We also did not pool data for pain experienced at one month after surgery in people with upper limb fractures (2 studies, 148 participants; very low-certainty evidence) because of substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Using a 10-point visual analogue scale, one study reported less pain with LIPUS (MD -1.7, 95% CI -3.03 to -0.37; 47 participants), and the effect was less precise in the other study (MD -0.4, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.53; 101 participants). We found little or no difference in skin irritation (a possible treatment-related adverse event) between groups but judged the certainty of the evidence from this small study to be very low (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.65; 1 study, 101 participants). No studies reported data for functional recovery. Data for treatment adherence were inconsistently reported across studies, but was generally described to be good. Data for costs were reported for one study, with higher direct costs, as well as combined direct and indirect costs, for LIPUS use. ECSW versus control (1 study, 56 participants) We are uncertain whether ECSW reduces pain at 12 months after surgery in fractures of the lower limb (MD -0.62, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.27, favours ECSW); the difference between pain scores was unlikely to be clinically important, and the certainty of the evidence was very low. We are also uncertain of the effect of ECSW on delayed or non-union at 12 months because the certainty of this evidence is very low (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.01; 1 study, 57 participants). There were no treatment-related adverse events. This study reported no data for HRQoL, functional recovery, time to return to normal activities, or time to fracture union. In addition, no data were available for adherence or cost.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were uncertain of the effectiveness of ultrasound and shock wave therapy for acute fractures in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS), for which few studies reported data. It is probable that LIPUS makes little or no difference to delayed union or non-union. Future trials should be double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials recording validated PROMs and following up all trial participants. Whilst time to union is difficult to measure, the proportion of participants achieving clinical and radiographic union at each follow-up point should be ascertained, alongside adherence with the study protocol and cost of treatment in order to better inform clinical practice.

Triathlete with Multiple Stress Fractures in the Lower Limbs: Case Report and Literature Review

Recurrent stress fractures rarely affect the same athlete. We present the case of a female triathlete who suffered multiple stress fractures in both tibias, the right fibula, and the left femoral neck. Conservative treatment was instituted in all episodes, with rest, reduced training load, and physical therapy rehabilitation. The relative energy deficiency in sport syndrome, along with an eating disorder, training overload, and osteopenia, was identified as a risk factor. Although rare, multiple stress fractures can occur in female triathletes. These patients must be screened for risk factors associated with biomechanics, nutrition, and training to develop an effective prevention and treatment program.

Do stress fractures induce hypertrophy of the grafted fibula? A report of three cases received free vascularized fibular graft treatment for tibial defects

The presence of large segmental defects of the diaphyseal bone is challenging for orthopedic surgeons. Free vascularized fibular grafting (FVFG) is considered to be a reliable reconstructive procedure. Stress fractures are a common complication following this surgery, and hypertrophy is the main physiological change of the grafted fibula. The exact mechanism of hypertrophy is not completely known. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have examined the possible relationship between stress fractures and hypertrophy. We herein report three cases of patients underwent FVFG. Two of them developed stress fractures and significant hypertrophy, while the remaining patient developed neither stress fractures nor significant hypertrophy. This phenomenon indicates that a relationship may exist between stress fractures and hypertrophy of the grafted fibula, specifically, that the presence of a stress fracture may initiate the process of hypertrophy.

Trends in the incidence of atypical femoral fractures and bisphosphonate therapy

PURPOSE

To report the trends in the incidence of typical and atypical femoral fractures (AFF) in patients aged >50 years from 2009 to 2014 and in the prescription of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis from 2001 to 2013 in Australia.

METHODS

175 patients aged >50 years presenting to our hospital with an AO type 32 femoral shaft fracture between October 2009 and October 2014 were identified using a trauma database. Of them, 21 male and 110 female patients with a mean age of 75 years were reviewed. Radiographs were reviewed by 2 investigators blinded to the use of bisphosphonates. The femoral shaft fractures were classified as typical or atypical using the American Society of Bone and Mineral Research definition, and their annual incidence was compared. The trend and number of prescriptions for various bisphosphonates in Australia was determined using the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme statistics from 2001 to 2013.

RESULTS

Of the 131 femoral shaft fractures, 65 were typical and 66 were atypical subtrochanteric (n=19) or diaphyseal (n=47) fractures that were complete (n=60) or incomplete (n=6). Four patients had sequential bilateral AFF. The 66 AFFs accounted for 5% of hip and shaft fractures. Women accounted for 80% of all femoral shaft fractures and 95% of AFF. The proportion of AFF was higher in women than men (63/110 vs. 3/21, relative risk=3.95, 95% CI=1.37- 11.39, p=0.0006). The mean length of hospital stay was 9.7 days shorter in the AFF patients (14.1 vs. 23.8 days, 95% CI=2.6-16.8 days, p=0.008). Patients with AFF were 8 years younger than those with proximal femoral fracture (73 vs. 81 years, p<0.0001). There was no trend in the annual incidence or proportion of AFF from 2009 to 2014 (p=0.70). The bisphosphonate usage was highest in 2007 with 260 000 yearly patient treatments and had declined by 30% by the end of 2013.

CONCLUSION

AFF accounted for half of all femoral shaft fractures in patients aged >50 years. Women accounted for 80% of all femoral shaft fractures and 95% of AFF. The incidence of AFF was no longer increasing possibly related to decreased prescription of bisphosphonates in preceding years.

One-stage long-stem total knee arthroplasty for arthritic knees with stress fractures

PURPOSE. To evaluate the outcome of one-stage long-stem total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for patients with arthritic knees and tibiofemoral stress fractures. METHODS. Records of 11 men and 18 women aged 47 to 78 (mean, 66) years who underwent fixed-bearing posterior-stabilised TKA for osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis of the knee with tibial (n=31) and femoral (n=3) stress fractures were reviewed. All the tibial fractures involved the proximal half. There were 7 associated fibular stress fractures. Of the 31 knees with tibial stress fractures, 26 and 5 manifested varus and valgus deformity, respectively. RESULTS. The mean follow-up period was 51 (range, 24-96) months. The mean tibiofemoral angle improved from 23.2 to 1.9 degrees varus. The mean Knee Society knee score improved from 38.5 (range, 15- 63) to 89.6 (range, 80-95) [p<0.05]. The mean Knee Society functional score improved from 25.5 (range, 0-40) to 86.5 (range, 60-100) [p<0.05]. All fractures were united at the last follow-up. No complications were encountered. CONCLUSION. One-stage long-stem TKA restores limb alignment and facilitates fracture healing, with excellent outcome.

Insufficiency fracture of the proximal fibula and then tibia: a case report

Elderly people with osteoarthritis of the knee and postpartum women are at risk of insufficiency fractures of the proximal fibular or tibia. We report on an 82-year-old woman with valgus osteoarthritis of the knee who developed insufficiency fractures of the right proximal fibula and then the right proximal tibia. She underwent total knee arthroplasty using a long tibial stem and a tibial locking plate with the Less Invasive Stabilization System.