Parameters Pointing at an Increased Risk for Contralateral Hip Fractures: Systematic Review

Impact of Stroke History on the Risk of Recurrent Hip Fracture or Major Osteoporotic Fractures among Patients with Incident Hip Fracture: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Considerable uncertainty prevails regarding risk factors for recurrent fracture among older patients with hip fracture. We aimed to investigate the relationship between prefracture stroke history, baseline mobility, and the risk of recurrent hip fracture. This cohort study was based on the Danish Multidisciplinary Hip Fracture Registry, 2011-2018 (n = 48,230). We estimated cumulative incidence (competing risk of death) of recurrent hip fracture and major osteoporotic fractures within 1 and 2 years comparing patients with/without prefracture stroke history. Analyses were performed overall and stratified on baseline mobility status (good mobility: Cumulated Ambulation Score ≥ 5 versus poor mobility: Cumulated Ambulation Score < 5). Using Cox regression, adjusted cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained. The 1-year cumulative incidence was 4.6% (95% CI: 3.9-5.4) among patients with stroke history and 4.3% (95% CI: 4.1-4.5) among patients without stroke history. For patients with good mobility, the cumulative incidence of recurrent hip fracture was 5.8% (95% CI: 4.3-7.5) versus 3.7% (95% CI: 3.4-4.0) for patients with versus without stroke history. Corresponding numbers for patients with poor mobility were 4.4% (95% CI: 3.6-5.5) and 5.0% (95% CI: 4.7-5.3). Stroke history was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.55 (95% CI: 1.15-2.10) for recurrent fracture among patients with good mobility. In contrast, no association was observed among patients with poor mobility (adjusted HR 0.88 [95% CI: 0.70-1.10]). The associations were attenuated after 2 years of follow-up and for major osteoporotic fractures. In conclusion, stroke history was associated with slightly higher risk of recurrent fracture among patients with first-time hip fracture in the overall analysis, although the CI included a null result. The association was modified by baseline mobility: Patients with stroke history and good mobility had a markedly higher risk, whereas patients with stroke and poor mobility did not. © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

The impact of sequential therapy from short-term teriparatide to denosumab compared with denosumab alone in patients with osteoporotic hip fracture: a 1-year follow-up study

Background

Sequential therapy from bone-forming medication to resorptive agents is reportedly effective for patients with severe osteoporosis. The objective of this study is to determine the impact of implementing short-term teriparatide (TPTD) intervention before denosumab (DMab) therapy compared with DMab therapy alone for 1 year after hip fracture.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and radiographs of patients who were treated due to osteoporotic hip fracture. TPTD was administered to 22 patients for an average of 12.1 weeks after which the intervention was switched to DMab therapy for 12 months (group 1). DMab alone was administered to 16 patients for 12 months (group 2). Bone mineral density (BMD) was evaluated before and after treatment at the 1-year follow-up. The improvement of BMD in hip and spine was compared with the levels of bone turnover marker.

Results

The difference in femoral neck BMD was 0.005 ± 0.04 in group 1 and − 0.014 ± 0.10 in group 2 (p = 0.442). The difference of spine BMD was 0.043 ± 0.05 in group 1 and 0.052 ± 0.06 in group 2 (p = 0.640). BMD of the spine improved significantly in groups 1 and 2 (p < 0.001, p = 0.002). There was no statistical difference in C-terminal telopeptide and osteocalcin level.

Conclusion

Short-term TPTD administration followed by DMab alone was effective only in improving spine BMD. Short-term treatment with TPTD caused mild improvement in femur neck BMD compared with DMab alone. However, further research with a longer duration of TPTD treatment is warranted, as our findings lack statistical significance.

Expert consensus on relevant risk predictors for the occurrence of osteoporotic fractures in specific clinical subgroups - Delphi survey

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing discussion about incorporating additional risk factors to established WHO fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) to improve the prediction accuracy in clinical subgroups. We aimed to reach an expert consensus on possible additional predictive parameters for specific clinical subgroups.

METHODS

Two-round modified Delphi survey: We generated a shortlist of experts from the authors' lists of the pertinent literature and complemented the list with experts known to the authors. Participants were asked to name possible relevant risk factors besides the FRAX-parameters for the occurrence of osteoporotic fractures. Experts specified these possible predictors for specific subgroups of patients. In the second round the expert panel was asked to weight each parameter of every subgroup assigning a number between one (not important) to ten (very important). We defined the threshold for an expert consensus if the interquartile range (IQR) of a predictor was ≤2. The cut-off value of the median attributed weights for a relevant predictor was set at ≥7.

RESULTS

Eleven experts of seven countries completed both rounds of the Delphi. The participants agreed on nine additional parameters for seven categories. For the category "secondary osteoporosis", "older adults" and "nursing home patients", there was a consensus that history of previous falls was relevant, while for men and postmenopausal women, there was a consensus that the spine fracture status was important. For the group "primary and secondary osteoporosis" the experts agreed on the parameters "high risk of falls", "lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD)" and "sarcopenia".

CONCLUSION

This Delphi survey reached a consensus on various parameters that could be used to refine the currently existing FRAX for specific clinical situations or patient groups. The results may be useful for studies aiming at improving the predictive properties of instruments for fracture prediction.

Clinical characteristics of osteoporotic second hip fracture: From the data of Clinical Pathway with Regional Alliance in rural region in Japan

BACKGROUND

Second osteoporotic fracture of the hip is a serious comorbidity that can directly cause mortality. Preventing its occurrence is particularly important in Japan, given its rapidly aging society. Here, the clinical characteristics of such recurrence were evaluated using the data of the Clinical Pathway with Regional Alliance (CPRA).

METHODS

CPRA for hip fracture started in 2007 and has allowed intranet-based data sharing since July 2011. Data from this alliance, such as number of second cases, duration from initial fracture, Functional Impairment Measure (FIM), revised Hasegawa Dementia Scale (HDS-R) score, muscle force and range of motion of hip joint, and gait status (GS) were collected and statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 45 of 1118 cases (2.68/100 person-years) developed a second fracture. The mean interval from initial to second fracture was 13.3 months. Thirty of these cases (66.7%, 1.79/100 person-years) occurred within 1 year from initial fracture (G < 1Y). The second fracture tended to be associated with worse parameter values than initial fracture, especially for GS. FIM score for cognitive function, HDS-R score, and GS at acute fracture in the G < 1Y group were significantly lower than in the initial fracture patient group (Initial). The withdrawal rate was also significantly higher than for Initial, whereas deaths and serious comorbidities were also much more numerous.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoporotic second hip fracture is a severe issue, and its prognosis is remarkably poor. The majority of these cases may occur within 1 year from the initial fracture. Dementia severity correlates with such recurrence within 1 year.

Second Hip Fracture: Incidence, Trends, and Predictors

Older persons who have suffered a hip fracture (HFx) are at increased risk of subsequent hip fractures. The cumulative incidence of a second hip fracture (SHFx) has been estimated in 8.4%; however, no studies have been carried out in our country, and the information on risk markers of SHFx is limited. The aim of this study was to estimate the incidence, explore trends, and examine predictors of SHFx in a suburban population of Spain. An observational longitudinal retrospective study was performed in a universal health coverage setting (Alcorcón, 1999-2011). Data were obtained from the area hospital discharge database. Annual incidence of HFx was estimated over 100,000 population (general and persons with HFx), and median time to SHFx by Kaplan-Meier tables. Cox regression was used for the analysis of association between SHFx and baseline predictors, measured by hazard ratio (HR). Among the 3430 patients who suffered a first HFx in the study period, 255 (7.4%) experienced a SHFx (4.5% of men and 8.5% of women). Median time between the first and second HFx was 3.7 years (SD 3.2). Annual incidence of HFx in population over 45 was 290.5 per 100,000 inhabitants (131.03 in men and 433.11 in women). Annual incidence of SHFx among persons with a HFx was 956.7 per 100,000 (1052.1 in women and 595.5 in men). There was a decline trend along the study period with an annual reduction of 10.4% (95% CI 7.7-13.0%; p < 0.001) in both sexes. The following associations were found: female sex (HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.97-2.02), age (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), living in a nursing house (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.10-1.94), and moderate to severe liver disease (HR 4.96, 95% CI 1.23-20.06). In our environment the occurrence of a SHFx is 7.4%, three-fold risk compared to no previous HFx. Being woman, elderly, living in a nursing home, and having severe to moderate liver disease may be important predictors of a SHFx. There seems to be adequate time between the first and the SHFx for interventions that may reduce the risk.

Expert Consensus on Predictive Parameters for the Occurrence of a Fall and a Contralateral Hip Fracture 1 and 3 Years After Hip Fracture: A Delphi Survey

Background:

Early identification of people at risk for a contralateral hip fracture would be desirable to favorably influence patients’ prognosis. A recent systematic review failed to depict stringent patterns of risk parameters to be used for decision-making in clinical practice.

Objective:

To perform a consensus study using the Delphi method to reach an expert consensus on predictive parameters for the occurrence of a fall and a contralateral hip fracture 1 and 3 years after hip fracture.

Methods:

A list of potential members of the expert panel was identified based on the authors’ list of a recently conducted systematic review. Participating experts were asked to name parameters determining the probability for a fall and a contralateral hip fracture 1 and 3 years after an occurred hip fracture, separately. Additionally, we asked how those stated parameters should be measured. All mentioned parameters were compiled and sent back to the experts asking them to weight each single parameter by assigning a number between 1 (not important) and 10 (very important). The survey was conducted online using the REDCap software package. We defined expert agreement if the interquartile range of attributed weights for a parameter was ≤2. A relevant parameter had at least a median weight of 8.

Results:

Twelve experts from 7 countries completed the survey. Presence of fall history and mental and general health status were considered relevant irrespective of the outcome. For falling within 1 and 3 years, the number of medications and residential status were considered relevant, while for fractures within 1 and 3 years, osteoporosis management was considered important.

Conclusion:

Using the insights gained in this consensus study, empiric studies need to be set up assessing the prognostic value of the selected parameters.

Prophylactic augmentation of the osteoporotic proximal femur-mission impossible?

The high incidence of secondary hip fractures and the associated markedly increased mortality call for preventive actions that could help to avoid these injuries. By providing immediate strengthening and not relying on patient compliance, internal prophylactic augmentation of the osteoporotic proximal femur may overcome the main limitations of systemic bone drugs and wearable protective pads. However, such a method would have to provide sufficient and reliable strengthening effect with minimal risks and side effects to justify the need of an invasive treatment. The requirements for an internal reinforcement approach are thus strict and include mechanical, biological, clinical, ethical and financial criteria. Here we first attempt to describe the properties of an ideal augmentation method. Previously published methodologies and techniques developed at our research institute, including approaches using cements, metals, other materials or combined approaches, are then reviewed and evaluated according to these aspects. We conclude that none of the discussed methodologies appears to be able to deliver a sufficiently high gain-versus-risk ratio that could justify the clinical application and thus augmentation of the osteoporotic proximal femur remains a challenge. Finally, we provide suggestions for the development and evaluation of future strategies.