L5-S1 facet joint pathology in pelvic ring injuries
- PMID: 39311982
- DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-04107-1
L5-S1 facet joint pathology in pelvic ring injuries
Abstract
Background: The authors believe that the L5-S1 facet joint injury in the setting of pelvic fractures is underappreciated by orthopedic traumatologists. The purpose of this study was to draw attention to the L5/S1 facet joint in the setting of pelvic ring injuries.
Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study of all patients greater than or equal to 18 years of age with an acute pelvic ring injury (AO/OTA 62 B to C) presenting to a single level I trauma center. The primary objective was to determine demographic and injury characteristics associated with L5-S1 facet joint injuries in patients with pelvic ring injuries. The secondary objective was to determine the proportion of L5-S1 facet joint injuries that were missed on initial radiographic workup.
Results: There were 476 patients included in the analysis, 53 (11.1%) of whom had an L5-S1 facet joint injury. Patients with an L5-S1 injury were more likely to be younger (44.1 vs. 53.2 years, p = 0.001) and experience a high energy mechanism of injury (95.0% vs. 78.0%, p = 0.002). Certain injury patterns were associated with L5-S1 facet joint injuries: any sacral fracture (96.2% vs. 73.8%, p < 0.001), Denis zone 2 fractures (43.4% vs. 20.1%, p < 0.001), Denis zone 3 fractures (34.0% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001), bilateral displaced sacral fractures (18.9% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001), and L5 transverse process fractures (64.2% vs. 18.0%, p < 0.001). Only 16.0% of radiology reports identified an L5-S1 injury.
Conclusions: Orthopedic traumatologists should scrutinize imaging for L5-S1 facet joint injuries in the presence of pelvic ring injuries, especially in patients with certain sacral fracture patterns.
Keywords: L5-S1 facet injury; Lumbopelvic fixation; Missed injury; Pelvic ring injury; Spinopelvic fixation.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Brouwers L, Lansink KWW, de Jongh MAC (2018) Quality of life after pelvic ring fractures: a cross-sectional study. Injury 49(4):812–818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2018.03.012 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Martin MP 3rd, Rojas D, Dean CS, Lockwood W, Nadeau J, Maertens A, Parry J, Maher M, Funk A, Stacey S, Burlew CC, Mauffrey C (2021) Psychological outcomes affect functional outcomes in patients with severe pelvic ring fractures. Injury 52(10):2750–2753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2020.02.071 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Dean CS, Nadeau J, Strage KE, Tucker NJ, Chambers L, Worster K, Rojas D, Schneider G, Johnson T, Hunt K, Parry JA, Mauffrey C (2022) Analysis of postoperative gait, hip strength, and patient-reported outcomes after OTA/AO 61-B and 61-C pelvic ring injuries. J Orthop Trauma 36(9):432–438. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002359 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Leone A, Cerase A, Priolo F, Marano P (1997) Lumbosacral junction injury associated with unstable pelvic fracture: classification and diagnosis. Radiology 205(1):253–259. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.205.1.9314994 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Oransky M, Gasparini G (1997) Associated lumbosacral junction injuries (LSJIs) in pelvic fractures. J Orthop Trauma 11(7):509–512. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-199710000-00008 - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
