Fragility fractures of the pelvis: First 48 cases of surgical treatment at a level 1 trauma center in France.

INTRODUCTION: Longer life expectancy is accompanied by a higher incidence of fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP), which has repercussions on mortality and nursing home admissions. Given the paucity of data at French healthcare facilities, we carried out a retrospective study to (1) evaluate how surgical treatment of FFP with posterior displacement (type III and IV according to Rommens and Hofmann) affects a patient's pain, functional status and ability to stay at home and (2) evaluate the postoperative complications and mortality rate. HYPOTHESIS: Surgery for posteriorly displaced FFP will relieve pain and preserve the patient's independence. METHODS: All the patients over 65 years of age who were operated on for a posterior FFP between January 2015 and August 2020 were included in this prospective, single-center study. The demographics, fracture type, details of the surgical treatment, complications and mortality were analyzed. Pain (visual analog scale, VAS), functional status (Activity of Daily Living [ADL] and Instrumental Activity of Daily Living [IADL]), mobility (Parker score) and rates of nursing home admissions were compared before the fracture, after surgery and at a mean follow-up of 28 months (minimum follow-up of 1 year). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with a mean age of 75 years were included. Twenty-four of these patients (50%) had at least two comorbidities. The FFPs were either type IV (31/48; 65%) or type III (17/48; 35%). The mean VAS for pain was significantly lower on the first day postoperative (3.5 versus 4.8; p=0.02). This significant reduction continued upon discharge from the hospital (1.95; p=0.003) and persisted at the mean follow-up of 28 months (2.2; p=0.64). The complication rate was 15% (7/48) and the mortality rate at the final review was 15% (7/48). Among the surviving patients, 81% (29/36) returned to living at home. The ADL (5.1 versus 5.8; p=0.09), IADL (5.9 versus 6.9; p=0.15) and Parker score (6.8 versus 8.2; p=0.08) at the final review were not significantly different from the values before the fracture. CONCLUSION: This is the first French study of patients operated on for an FPP. Fixation of posteriorly displaced fractures allows surviving patients to retain their mobility. Pain relief is achieved quickly and maintained during the follow-up period. Thus, our initial hypothesis is affirmed. The complication rate is not insignificant; given the complexity of this surgery, percutaneous treatment is preferable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective study.

Simulation Software to Plan the Treatment of Acetabular Fractures: The Patient-Specific Biomechanical Model.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of using simulation software for preoperative planning: a patient-specific biomechanical model (PSBM) in acetabular surgery. The secondary objectives were to assess operating time, intraoperative bleeding, and peroperative complications. DESIGN: This is a prospective control study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Between January 2019 and December 2022, patients with operative acetabular fracture treated by the first author were prospectively enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the use or not of PSBM for preoperative planning. When PSBM was used, data were extracted from the preoperative high-resolution computed tomography scans to build a biomechanical model implemented in a custom software [simulation (SIM group)]. When computed tomography scans were not performed in our hospital, PSBM was not feasible (non-SIM group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Radiological results, surgery duration, blood loss, and peroperative complications were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included; 26 in the PSBM group and 40 in the standard group. The 2 groups were comparable regarding fracture patterns and epidemiological data. After simulation, in the SIM group, a poor reduction (>3 mm) was found in 2 of 26 patients (7.7%) versus 11 of 40 patients (27.5%) in the non-SIM group, P = 0.048. The mean operative time was shorter after simulation (110 minutes vs. 155 minutes, P = 0.01), and the mean blood loss was reduced (420 vs. 670 mL, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: By reducing the peroperative trials for reduction, PSBM allows better reduction in a shorter operative time and with less blood loss. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II: prospective study.