Standard imaging in the emergency department in geriatric patients with immobilizing pelvic pain after low-energy trauma or without trauma: X-ray vs. computed tomography.

PURPOSE: Geriatric pelvic ring injuries, evaluated solely by X-ray, are often misclassified or even missed. This can result in prolonged immobilization and persistent pelvic pain. The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of X-ray imaging in patients aged ≥ 70 years with immobilizing pelvic pain. METHODS: 107 geriatric patients (23 males, 84 females) with immobilizing pain after traumatic or atraumatic causes were included in this retrospective study. 91 patients had an anteroposterior (AP) X-ray of the pelvis and after that a computed tomography (CT) of the pelvis. All patients were treated in a level 1 trauma center from December 2018 to September 2020. The mean age was 83.07 ± 6.08 years. RESULTS: The overall evaluation of the diagnostic performance of AP Pelvic X-ray imaging in the study population compared to the CT pelvis ("gold standard") resulted in a sensitivity of (2.7 %) and a specificity of (94.4 %). Specific for pelvic ring fractures in the study population there was a sensitivity of (3.4 %) and a specificity of (94.4 %). CONCLUSION: The results highlights issues with the AP Pelvic X-ray as the diagnostic tool of choice in this study population, confirming the findings of previous studies on the underestimated problem of osteoporotic pelvic ring fractures in geriatric patients. This again confirms the need for a new optimized diagnostic algorithm, which takes into account the differences of the orthogeriatric patient cohort.

Bone defect treatment: does the type and properties of the spacer affect the induction of Masquelet membrane? Evidence today.

PURPOSE: High clinical success rates have been reported with the Masquelet technique in the treatment of traumatic bone loss. An increasing number of studies suggest that various factors can influence the properties of induced membranes. Goal of this systematic review is to answer the following questions: (1) which are the ideal spacer properties (material, surface topography, antibiotic supplementation) to booster the quality and osteogenic potential of induced membranes? (2) what is the ideal time to perform the second-stage operation? METHODS: A systematic search using the keywords "((Masquelet) OR (Induced Periosteum)) AND ((Spacer) OR (Time))" was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published up to the 23rd of February 2022 were included and assessed independently by two reviewers. RESULTS: Thirteen animal and 1 clinical studies were identified to address the above questions. Spacer materials used were PMMA, silicone, titanium, polypropylene, PVA, PCL and calcium sulfate. With the exception of PVA sponges, all solid materials could induce membranes. Low union rates have been reported with titanium and rough surfaced spacers. Scraping of the inner surface of the IM also increased bony union rates. In terms of the ideal timing to perform the second-stage evidence suggests that membranes older than 8 weeks continue to have regenerative capacities similar to younger ones. CONCLUSION: Membranes induced by smooth PMMA spacers loaded with low concentrations of antibiotics showed powerful osteogenic properties. Other materials such as Polypropylene or Calcium sulfate can also be used with good results. Despite current recommendation to perform the second stage operation in 4-8 weeks, membranes older than 8 weeks seem to have similar regenerative capacities to younger ones.