Teriparatide and pelvic fracture healing: a phase 2 randomized controlled trial

Low Rate of Teriparatide Supplementation for the Treatment of Osteoporotic Pelvic Fractures in Elderly Females

Background

Osteoporotic pelvic fractures in the elderly lead to pain and immobility resulting in decreased quality of life and worsening frailty. Teriparatide has been shown to shorten time to fracture union, diminish pain, and improve mobilization. At our hospital, this medication is prescribed by an outpatient endocrinologist or geriatrician. We hypothesize that elderly female patients sustaining low energy lateral compression (LC) pelvic fractures are not given Teriparatide. This study reports rates of successful Teriparatide initiation and looks for areas of improvement.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective chart review of stable LC pelvic fractures admitted to a single urban academic level 1 trauma center from January 2012 to February 2021 was conducted. Females over 60 years old with stable LC pelvic fractures were included. Males and those aged less than 60 were excluded.

Results

118 females with mean age of 79.1 ± 10.5 were included. Fourteen patients were not eligible for Teriparatide due to medical history, leaving 104 eligible patients. Twenty-eight patients (23.7%) had previous dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans with mean T-scores of -3.14 ± 1.1 and 61% had Medicare insurance. Orthopaedic services recommended Teriparatide in 100% of cases. Geriatricians or endocrinologists documented evaluations for Teriparatide in 18 (17%), prescribed in 10 (9.6%), and initiated in 7 (6.7%) patients. Insurance type did not significantly differ among those that initiated Teriparatide and those that did not (p-0.10). Insurance did not approve the medication in 2 instances and in 1 instance it was discontinued at follow-up.

Conclusion

Despite level 1 evidence of Teriparatide's benefit for elderly osteoporotic women with low energy LC pelvic fractures, we failed to initiate treatment in 93% of eligible patients. Barriers to initiation included low rates of medical evaluation for its use and failure of insurance coverage. There are opportunities for multidisciplinary collaboration to increase evaluation for and initiation of Teriparatide.

Level of Evidence

Cohort Retrospective (level III evidence).

Pharmacological agents for bone fracture healing: talking points from recent clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacological strategies might influence bone healing in terms of time to union or quality of mature bone. This expert opinion discussed the current level I evidence on the experimental pharmacological agents used to favor bone fracture healing.

AREAS COVERED

This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the 2020 PRISMA statement. In April 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Embase. All the randomized clinical trials investigating pharmacological agents for bone fracture healing were accessed. No time constraint was set for the search. The search was restricted to RCTs. No additional filters were used in the database search. Data from 19 RCTs (4067 patients) were collected. 78% (3160 of 4067) were women. The mean length of the follow-up was 9.3 months (range, 1-26 months). The mean age of the patients was 64.4 years (range, 8-84 years).

EXPERT OPINION

Calcitonin could favor bone fracture healing. Bisphosphonates (alendronate, zoledronate, clodronate), monoclonal antibodies (denosumab, romosozumab), statins, vitamin D and calcium supplementation, strontium ranelate, and ibuprofen did not influence bony healing. Concerning the effect of parathormone, current level I evidence is controversial, and additional studies are required.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, systematic review of RCTs.

Teriparatide treatment shows faster healing than sacroplasty for postmenopausal women with sacral insufficiency fracture

Objectives

Sacral insufficiency fracture (SIF) is not an uncommon osteoporosis fracture among the elderly. Aside from traditional treatments, sacroplasty and teriparatide (TPTD) injection have been introduced. This report aims to compare the effects of sacroplasty and teriparatide on clinical outcomes of SIF.

Methods

Thirty-one elderly patients with SIF were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. Four male patients were excluded. Fourteen patients who received TPTD for 6 months were classified into the TPTD group (TT), and 13 who underwent sacroplasty were classified into the sacroplasty group (SS). All patients in both groups were instructed to take calcium and vitamin D supplements daily. Their symptoms and signs, visual analog score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and radiographic studies were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

The TT group showed significantly lower VAS than SS group after 3 (P < 0.001) and 6 months of treatment (P < 0.001). The TT group also has significant lower ODI than SS group after 1 (P = 0.010), 3 (P = 0.005) and 6 months (P < 0.001) of treatment. Upon generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis, the TT group showed significantly more reduction in both VAS and ODI compared to the SS group at 1 month (P = 0.022, P = 0.001), 3 months (P < 0.001, P < 0.001), and 6 months (P < 0.001, P < 0.001) post-treatment.

Conclusions

Postmenoposal woman with SIF who received TPTD healed better than those who underwent sacroplasty after 1 month treatment.

Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis: Current Practices and Future Directions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarise the current evidence and clinical practices for patients with fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP).

RECENT FINDINGS

FFPs are an increasingly prevalent and recognised problem in the elderly population. Recent evidence indicates they have a significant impact on function, morbidity and mortality. While traditional management of FFPs was predominantly non-surgical, surgical options have been increasingly used, with a range of surgical methods available. To date, limited consensus exists on the optimal strategy for suitable patient selection, and clinical trials in this population have proved problematic. The management of FFPs requires a multi-faceted approach to enhance patient care, including adequate pain control, minimisation of complications and optimisation of medical management. Early return to mobilisation should be a key treatment goal to maintain functional independence. The selection of patients who will maximally benefit from surgical treatment, and the most appropriate surgical strategy to employ, remains contentious.

Fragility fractures of the pelvis in the older population

Pelvic fractures are an increasingly common injury seen in the older population and represent a significant burden of morbidity and mortality in this age group, as well as a large financial burden on the health service. It is well established that early fixation of femoral neck and acetabular fractures improves outcomes and increases the chances of patients returning close to their premorbid functional baseline. However, fixation of fragility fractures of the pelvis is less well established in current practice. There has been recent development of novel stabilisation techniques for unstable pelvic fractures, designed to tackle the difficulties associated with fixation in poor bone quality, along with medical trials of parathyroid hormone analogue treatment. However, it is still current practice to manage nearly all fragility fractures of the pelvis conservatively. In this article, we consider whether the development of surgical stabilisation techniques for pelvic fragility fractures may have the potential to improve the well-described morbidity and mortality associated with them.

Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis and Sacrum: Current Trends in Literature

Fragility fractures of the pelvis (FFP) and fragility fractures of the sacrum (FFS), which are emerging in the geriatric population, exhibit characteristics that differ from those of pelvic ring disruptions occurring in the younger population. Treatment of FFP/FFS by a multidisciplinary team can be helpful in reducing morbidity and mortality with the goal of reducing pain, regaining early mobility, and restoring independence for activities of daily living. Conservative treatment, including bed rest, pain therapy, and mobilization as tolerated, is indicated for treatment of FFP type I and type II as loss of stability is limited with these fractures. Operative treatment is indicated for FFP type II when conservative treatment has failed and for FFP type III and type IV, which are displaced fractures associated with intense pain and increased instability. Minimally invasive stabilization techniques, such as percutaneous fixation, are favored over open reduction internal fixation. There is little evidence regarding outcomes of patients with FFP/FFS and more literature is needed for determination of optimal management. The aim of this article is to provide a concise review of the current literature and a discussion of the latest recommendations for orthopedic treatment and management of FFP/FFS.