Effectiveness of surgical fixation for lateral compression type one (LC-1) fragility fractures of the pelvis: a systematic review

Evaluating Treatment Outcomes for Pelvic Insufficiency Fractures: A Systematic Review

Background: Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIF) are typical in geriatric populations with reduced bone quality, most commonly in elderly postmenopausal women. These fractures are usually caused by low-energy forces over the bones during ordinary life and cause disabling pain. Treatment options range from conservative to operative. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of treatments for pelvic insufficiency fractures, determining optimal approaches between surgical intervention and conservative management. Methods: This literature review systematically examines articles focusing on patients with PIF, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and using PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library database. We took into account only full-text articles in indexed journals with available English abstracts, considering data about patient demographics, surgery, and outcomes. Results: After screening 128 articles, this study reviewed 20 manuscripts involving 1499 patients, mostly elderly females and focusing on sacrum fractures. Common treatments included conservative methods and sacroplasty, with a few complications reported. Osteoporosis was the prevalent comorbidity, and the survival rate post-treatment was high at 92.3%. Mobility outcomes varied, with some patients experiencing significant autonomy loss. The average follow-up period was over 17 months. Conclusions: This study found a cautious approach to surgery (timing of three weeks), which is reserved only for specific patterns, and it leads to increased autonomy and a lower risk of mortality. Due to the lack of pre- and postoperative scores as well as conflicting results, it is imperative to undertake further studies and research to be able to compare the alternative treatments efficiently.

What interventions add value in lateral compression type 1 fragility pelvis fractures? A retrospective cohort study

Introduction

Fragility fractures are a large source of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Orthopaedic surgeons are regularly the main point of contact in patients with lateral compression type 1 pelvis fractures, despite many of these being treated non-operatively. This study aims to identify risk factors for mortality and elucidate which follow-up visits have the potential to improve care for these patients.

Methods and materials

In all, 211 patients have been identified with fragility lateral compression type 1 fractures at a level 1 trauma centre over a 5-year period. For all patients, we recorded patient demographics, imaging data, hospital readmissions, medical complications and death dates if applicable.

Results

Of the 211 patients identified, 56.4% had at least one orthopaedic follow-up, of which no patient had a clinically meaningful medical intervention initiated. 30-day readmission rate was 19%, and 1-year mortality was 24%. Male sex, need for an assist device, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index and increased age were found to be statistically associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients who followed up with their primary care physician were found to have a statistically lower risk of mortality. Computed tomography scans were obtained in 70% of patients and never limited patient weight-bearing status or found any additional injury not already identified on the radiograph.

Discussion/Conclusions

For patients with lateral compression type 1 type fragility fractures, orthopaedic surgeons did not offer additional clinically meaningful intervention after the time of initial diagnosis in this patient cohort. The rate of clinical follow-up with a primary care physician is relatively low despite high rates of medical comorbidity. Computed tomography scans were utilised frequently but did not change recommendations. The high rate of medical complications and lack of orthopaedic intervention suggest that we should re-evaluate the role of the orthopaedic surgeon versus the primary care physician as the primary point of medical contact for patients with these injuries.

Surgical versus non-surgical management of lateral compression type-1 pelvic fracture in adults 60 years and older: the L1FE RCT

Background

Lateral compression type-1 pelvic fractures are a common fragility fracture in older adults. Patients who do not mobilise due to ongoing pain are at greater risk of immobility-related complications. Standard treatment in the United Kingdom is provision of pain relief and early mobilisation, unlike fragility hip fractures, which are usually treated surgically based on evidence that early surgery is associated with better outcomes. Currently there is no evidence on whether patients with lateral compression type-1 fragility fractures would have a better recovery with surgery than non-surgical management.

Objectives

To assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of surgical fixation with internal fixation device compared to non-surgical management of lateral compression type-1 fragility fractures in older adults.

Design

Pragmatic, randomised controlled superiority trial, with 12-month internal pilot; target sample size was 600 participants. Participants were randomised between surgical and non-surgical management (1 : 1 allocation ratio). An economic evaluation was planned.

Setting

UK Major Trauma Centres.

Participants

Patients aged 60 years or older with a lateral compression type-1 pelvic fracture, arising from a low-energy fall and unable to mobilise independently to a distance of 3 m and back due to pelvic pain 72 hours after injury.

Interventions

Internal fixation device surgical fixation and non-surgical management. Participants, surgeons and outcome assessors were not blinded to treatment allocation.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcome - average patient health-related quality of life, over 6 months, assessed by the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version utility score. Secondary outcomes (over the 6 months following injury) - self-rated health, physical function, mental health, pain, delirium, displacement of pelvis, mortality, complications and adverse events, and resource use data for the economic evaluation.

Results

The trial closed early, at the end of the internal pilot, due to low recruitment. The internal pilot was undertaken in two separate phases because of a pause in recruitment due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The planned statistical and health economic analyses were not conducted. Outcome data were summarised descriptively. Eleven sites opened for recruitment for a combined total of 92 months. Three-hundred and sixteen patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 43 were eligible (13.6%). The main reason for ineligibility was that the patient was able to mobilise independently to 3 m and back (n = 161). Of the 43 eligible participants, 36 (83.7%) were approached for consent, of whom 11 (30.6%) provided consent. The most common reason for eligible patients not consenting to take part was that they were unwilling to be randomised to a treatment (n = 10). There were 11 participants, 5 randomised to surgical management with internal fixation device and 6 to non-surgical management. The average age of participants was 83.0 years (interquartile range 76.0, 89.0) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version utility score at 6 months post randomisation (n = 8) was 0.32 (standard deviation 0.37). A limitation of the trial was that study objectives were not addressed due to poor recruitment.

Conclusions

It was not feasible to recruit to this trial in the current context. Further research to understand the treatment and recovery pathways of this group of patients, along with their outcomes, would be needed prior to undertaking a future trial.

Future work

Exploration of equipoise across different healthcare professional groups. Investigate longer-term patient outcomes.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN16478561.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/167/57) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 15. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Comparison of the two surgery methods combined with accelerated rehabilitation in the treatment of lateral compression type 1 pelvic fractures in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Treating lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries in older patients is controversial. This study evaluated surgical treatments combined with ERAS for treating LC1 pelvic fractures in the elderly.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, patients who underwent surgery with INFIX (supra-acetabular spinal pedicle screws, and a subcutaneous connecting rod; the experimental group) or superior pubic ramus cannulated screw (the control group) fixation of LC1 pelvic fracture from January 2019 to January 2022 were reviewed. Injury radiography and computed tomography were performed to determine the Young-Burgess classification. All patients performed standardized early rehabilitation exercises after surgery and were followed up for > 12 months. After surgery, the Matta score and the visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated, and the postoperative weight-bearing time and the length of stay (LOS) were recorded. The Barthel index and the Majeed score were evaluated at 4 months after surgery and at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were included. Thirty-two patients included in the experimental group had a mean age of 75.0 ± 6.2 (range, 66-86) years, and the other 21 patients in the control group had a mean age of 74.6 ± 4.6 (range, 68-83) years. The mean follow-up time was 13.1 ± 1.6 (range, 12-18) months in the experimental group and 13.4 ± 1.3 (range, 12-16) months in the control group. There were no significant differences in follow-up time between the groups (P > 0.05). The mean VAS score, time to weight-bearing, and LOS were 2.0 ± 0.7 (range, 1-3), 1.1 ± 0.3 (range, 1-2) d, and 5.8 ± 0.9 (range, 4-7) d in the experimental group and 2.3 ± 1.2 (range, 1-5), 2.5 ± 1.6 (range, 1-7) d, and 6.1 ± 1.6 (range, 5-11) d in the control group, respectively. Between the two groups, there was a significant difference in the postoperative time to weight-bearing (P < 0.05), while there was no significant difference in the LOS (P > 0.05). No bedrest-related complications occurred in either group. The Matta score was 90.6% in the experimental group and 90.4% in the control group (P > 0.05). At the 4-months follow-up, the experimental group had a better Barthel index and Majeed score compared with the control group, which were 86.1 ± 6.2 (range, 70-95) vs. 81.2 ± 4.1 (range, 75-90) and 86.3 ± 3.3 (range, 78-91) vs. 80.3 ± 3.9 (range, 76-86), respectively. The experimental group had better early rehabilitation effect than the control group. There was no significant difference in Barthel index and Majeed score between the two groups at the last follow-up (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both INFIX and intramedullary superior pubic ramus cannulated screws can successfully treat LC1 pelvic fractures and reduce bed rest complications among older patients.

Imaging of pelvic ring fractures in older adults and its clinical implications-a systematic review

Identifying the full scope of pelvic fracture patterns in older adults has gained clinical importance since the last decennium. CT is recommended as the golden standard; however, MRI has even greater diagnostic accuracy. Dual energy computed tomography (DECT) is a new and promising imaging technique, but the diagnostic accuracy in the context of pelvic fragility fractures (FFPs) has not been widely established. The aim was to provide insight into the diagnostic accuracy of different imaging techniques and the relevance for clinical practice. A systematic search was performed in the PubMed database. All studies that reported on CT, MRI or DECT imaging techniques in older adults who suffered a pelvic fracture were reviewed and, if relevant, included. Eight articles were included. In up to 54% of the patients, additional fractures were found on MRI compared to CT, and in up to 57% of the patients on DECT. The sensitivity of DECT for posterior pelvic fracture detection was similar to MRI. All patients without fractures on CT appeared to have posterior fractures on MRI. After additional MRI, 40% of the patients had a change of classification. DECT and MRI showed very similar results in terms of diagnostic accuracy. Over a third of all patients appear to have a more severe fracture classification after MRI, the majority changing to Rommens type 4. However, in only a few patients who changed of fracture classification, a change of therapy was advised. This review suggests that MRI and DECT scans are superior in diagnosing FFPs.

Lateral compression type 1 fracture fixation in the elderly (L1FE): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (with internal pilot) comparing the effects of INFIX surgery and non-surgical management for treating patients with lateral compression type 1 (LC-1) fragility fractures

BACKGROUND

Lateral compression type1 (LC-1) fragility fractures are a common, painful injury in older adults resulting in reduced mobility. The incidence of these fractures is increasing with the growing older adult population. The current standard of care is non-surgical management; however, patients with this injury are at risk of long-term immobility and related complications. INFIX is a pelvic fixation device used in younger patients with high-energy fractures. The device is fitted via a percutaneous technique with no external pin sites and has good purchase even in osteoporotic bone. It therefore has the potential to be well tolerated in patients with LC-1 fragility fractures. INFIX could improve patients' ability to mobilise and reduce the risk of immobility-related complications. However, there is a risk of complications related to surgery, and robust evidence is required on patient outcomes. This study will investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of surgical fixation with INFIX compared to non-surgical management of LC-1 fragility fractures in older adults.

METHODS

A multi-centre randomised controlled trial of 600 patients allocated 1:1 to non-surgical management or INFIX surgery. The study will have a 12-month internal pilot to assess recruitment and trial feasibility. The primary outcome will be the patient quality of life over 6 months, measured by the patient-reported EQ-5D-5L. The secondary outcomes will include physical function, mental health, pain, delirium, imaging assessment, resource use, and complications.

DISCUSSION

The L1FE study aims to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical management of people aged 60 years and older with LC-1 fragility fractures. The trial is sufficiently powered and rigorously designed to inform future clinical and patient decision-making and allocation of NHS resources.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry ISRCTN16478561. Registered on 8 April 2019.

A systematic review regarding clinical characteristics, complications, and outcomes of surgical and non-surgical patients with fragility fracture of the pelvis

We conducted this systematic review to clarify the clinical characteristics, complications, and outcomes of surgical and non-surgical patients with fragility fracture of the pelvis (FFP). We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and MEDLINE for English language articles on FFP. We calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) of surgical patients in comparison to non-surgical patients for clinical characteristics (Rommens FFP classification, age, sex, dementia, osteoporosis, diabetes mellitus, pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, and malignancy), complications (pneumonia, urinary tract infection, cardiac event, thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, pressure ulcer, multiple organ failure, anemia caused by surgical bleeding, and surgical site infection), and outcomes (hospital mortality and one-year mortality). Five studies involving 1,090 patients with FFP (surgical patients, n = 432; non-surgical patients, n = 658) were included. FFP type III and IV (OR = 8.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.99 to 11.88; p<0.00001), a younger age (MD = -3.29; 95% CI -3.83 to -2.75; p<0.00001), the absence of dementia (OR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.57; p<0.0001), and the presence of osteoporosis (OR = 1.74; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.35; p = 0.0003) were significantly associated with the surgical patients. Urinary tract infection (OR = 2.06; 95% CI 1.37 to 3.10; p = 0.0005), anemia caused by surgical bleeding (OR = 4.55; 95% CI 1.95 to 10.62; p = 0.0005), and surgical site infection (OR = 16.74; 95% CI 3.05 to 91.87; p = 0.001) were significantly associated with the surgical patients. There were no significant differences in the outcomes between the surgical and non-surgical patients. Our findings may help to further understand the treatment strategy for FFP and improve clinical outcomes.

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.

The impact of specific fracture characteristics of low-energy fractures of the pelvis on mortality

Background

Pelvic fractures in older patients are associated with relevant morbidity and mortality. Both might be determined by fracture morphology and/or patient characteristics. The aim of this project is to investigate the prognostic value of specific fracture characteristics with respect to overall survival and to compare it with an established classification system.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients ≥ 60 years, treated conservatively for a CT-scan verified, low-energy pelvic ring fracture between August 2006 and December 2018. Survival data was available from patients’ charts and cantonal or national registries.

The prognostic value of fracture characteristic describing the anterior and posterior involvement of the pelvic ring was investigated. This analysis was repeated after patients were stratified into a high-risk vs a low-risk group according to patient characteristic (age, gender, comorbidities, mobility, living situation). This allowed to assess the impact of the different fracture morphologies on mortality in fit vs. frail senior patients separately.

Results

Overall, 428 patients (83.4% female) with a mean age of 83.7 years were included. Two thirds of patients were still living in their home and mobile without walking aid at baseline. In-hospital mortality was 0.7%, overall, one-year mortality 16.9%. An independent and significant association of age, gender and comorbidities to overall survival was found. Further, the occurrence of a horizontal sacral fracture as well as a ventral comminution or dislocation was associated with an increased mortality. The effect of a horizontal sacral fracture was more accentuated in low-risk patients while the ventral fracture components showed a larger effect on survival in high-risk patients.

Conclusion

Specific fracture characteristics may indicate a higher risk of mortality in conservatively treated patients with a low-energy pelvic ring fracture. Hence, they should be taken into account in future treatment algorithms and decisions on patient management.

Pelvic ring injuries after alpine ski and snowboard accidents

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the patient/injury characteristics and associated hospital course of patients sustaining traumatic pelvic ring injuries after alpine ski and snowboard accidents at a level one trauma center in the Rocky Mountain region.

METHODS

Patient/injury characteristics were obtained from patients presenting with pelvic ring injuries after alpine ski (n = 55) and snowboard (n = 9) accidents. Characteristics and outcomes analyzed included mechanism of injury, pelvic ring classification (Young-Burgess and Tile), hospital admission, physical therapy (PT) clearance, ambulation, length of stay, inpatient morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and discharges to rehabilitation facility.

RESULTS

Snowboarders were more often younger, male, tobacco/substance users, and more likely to be injured by a fall from height than skiers. There were no differences in injury classification or hospital course outcomes between alpine sports. Most common injuries included lateral compression type 1 (LC1) injuries (37.5%), isolated pubic ramus fractures (31.3%), and isolated iliac wing fractures (15.6%). LC1 injuries were unstable in 50% of cases and associated with increased admissions (proportional difference: 47.5%, CI: 23.8-64.5%, p = 0.0002), longer time to PT clearance (median difference(MD): 1.0 day, CI: 0-2.0, p = 0.03), longer LOS (MD: 2.0, CI: 0-2.0, p = 0.02), and increased inpatient MMEs (MD: 197.9 MME, CI: 30.0-420.0, p = 0.02), as compared to other pelvic ring injuries.

CONCLUSION

The majority of pelvic ring injuries from alpine ski and snowboard accidents were LC1 injuries, half of which were unstable, resulting in longer hospital stays, time to PT clearance/ambulation, and opioid use.

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.

Contributions of Pubic Rami Fracture Morphology and Fixation to Pelvic Ring Stability in Type 1 Lateral Compression Injuries: A Biomechanical Cadaveric Study

BACKGROUND

Treatment of lateral compression type 1 (LC-1) injuries has historically been nonoperative with immediate weight-bearing. However, management of these injuries remains controversial, with reports of displacement at follow-up for nonoperatively managed LC-1 fractures. The goal of our study was to determine the effect of superior pubic ramus fracture morphology and fixation construct on pelvic stability.

METHODS

Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric were transected into hemi-pelvises. Incomplete Denis type 1 sacral fractures were made. Hemi-pelvises were randomized to receive a transverse-type or oblique-type superior pubic ramus fracture with the contralateral hemi-pelvis receiving the opposing morphology. A lateral load to 135N was applied with an Instron materials testing machine and lateral displacement of the hemi-pelvis was recorded. Deflection and stiffness were calculated. Statistical analysis was conducted using a t test assuming unequal variances with an alpha = 0.05.

RESULTS

Oblique-type superior pubic ramus fractures allowed more deflection compared with transverse-type fractures in the absence of fixation (P = 0.018). The posterior-only and combined anterior and posterior fixation configurations on average reduced deflection more than no fixation or anterior fixation only. In all fixation configuration cases, the average deflection for transverse-type fractures was less than that of the oblique-type fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that displacement of LC-1 pelvic injuries may be related to pubic rami fracture morphology. When looking at initial injury imaging, oblique-type pubic rami fractures may suggest an increased potential for displacement over time. In such cases, we recommend an examination under anesthesia to evaluate for underlying instability and consideration for fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level V.

Unstable minimally displaced lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries have a similar hospital course as intertrochanteric femur fractures

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate how the hospital course of minimally displaced LC1 fractures, with and without occult instability, compares with that of intertrochanteric femur fractures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective comparative cohort analysis at an urban level one trauma center of 40 consecutive patients with an isolated LC1 pelvic ring injury and 40 age/sex matched patients with an isolated intertrochanteric femur fracture was performed. Medical records and radiographs were reviewed for patient and injury characteristics, including demographics, displacement, time to surgery, ambulation, physical therapy (PT) clearance, hospital length of stay (LOS), and inpatient morphine milligram equivalents (MME).

RESULTS

The LC1 pelvic ring injury group included 26 (65%) patients with ≥ 10 mm of displacement on lateral stress radiographs. The unstable LC1 group, compared to the stable LC1 group, had a greater LOS (median difference (MD): 2 days, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1 to 4, p = 0.0004), longer time to ambulate 15 feet (MD: 1 day, CI: 1 to 2, p = 0.0002), longer time to clear PT (MD: 2 days, CI: 1 to 3, p = 0.0003), and more inpatient MMEs (MD: 386 MME, CI: 225.8 to 546.7, p = 0.0002). The unstable LC1 and intertrochanteric fracture groups had no detectable differences in LOS (p = 0.24), days to ambulate 15 feet (p = 0.46), days to clear PT (p = 0.95), and inpatient MMEs (p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

Patients with minimally displaced unstable LC1 injuries had worse hospital courses than stable LC1 injuries and similar hospital courses as intertrochanteric femur fractures. These findings emphasize the associated morbidity of unstable LC1 injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective cohort study.

Operative management of fragility fractures of the pelvis - a systematic review

Background

The incidence of osteoporotic pelvic fractures in elderly patient is rising. This brings an increasing burden on health and social care systems as these injuries often lead to prolonged hospital admissions, loss of independence, morbidity and mortality. Some centres now advocate stabilisation of these injuries to reduce pain, facilitate early mobilisation, decrease hospital stay and restore independence. A systematic review of the literature was planned to establish the evidence for this intervention.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. A clinical librarian performed a search of the following databases: NHS Evidence, TRIP, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Seventeen eligible studies were identified with 766 patients.

Results

The quality of evidence was poor with no good quality randomised trials. The majority of injuries were minimally displaced. Posterior ring injuries were most often stabilised with percutaneous screws which were sometimes augmented with void filler. A number of techniques were described for stabilisation of the anterior ring although fixation of the anterior ring was frequently not performed.

There was consistent evidence from the included studies that operative intervention significantly improved pain. Complications were minimal but there were increased failure rates when a single unaugmented sacroiliac joint screw was used. The limited availability of non-operative comparators made it difficult to draw firm conclusions about the efficacy of surgical over non-surgical management in these patients.

Conclusions

Operative management of fragility fractures of the pelvis should be considered for patients failing a brief period of non-operative management, however prospective randomised trials need to be performed to provide improved evidence for this intervention. Surgeons should consider which fixation techniques for fragility fractures of the pelvis are robust enough to allow immediate weightbearing, whilst minimising operative morbidity and post-operative complications.

PROSPERO Systematic Review ID: CRD42020171237.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04579-w.

Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries: a spectrum of fracture types and treatment algorithms

Lateral compression type 1 (LC1) fractures are the commonest pelvic ring injury. However, they represent a heterogenous spectrum of injury mechanisms and fracture patterns, resulting in a lack of strong evidence for a universally agreed treatment algorithm. Although consensus exists that LC1 fractures have a preserved posterior ligamentous complex and are vertically stable, controversy persists around defining internal rotational instability. As such, treatment strategies extend from routine non-operative management through to dynamic imaging such as examination under anaesthetic (EUA) or stress radiographs to guide fixation algorithm. Multiple protocols sit between these two, all with slightly different thresholds for advocating surgery or otherwise, exemplifying a broad lack of consensus that is not seen for other, more severe, grades of pelvic ring injury. In the following review we discuss the evolving concepts of pelvic ring instability and management, starting from a historical perspective, through to current trends and controversies in LC1 fracture treatment. Emerging directions for research and emerging pharmacological and surgical treatments/technologies are also considered and expert commentary from 3 leading centres provided. The distinction is made between LC1 fracture arising from high-energy trauma and those following low-energy falls from standing height (so-called fragility fractures of the pelvis-FFP), since these two patient groups have different functional requirements and medical vulnerabilities. Issues pertaining to FFP are considered separately.