Assessment of the Initial Diagnostic Accuracy of a Fragility Fracture of the Sacrum: A Study of 56 Patients
- Author:
Ryo UMEDA
1
;
Yasushi IIJIMA
;
Nanako YAMAKAWA
;
Toshiaki KOTANI
;
Tsuyoshi SAKUMA
;
Shunji KISHIDA
;
Keisuke UENO
;
Daisuke KAJIWARA
;
Tsutomu AKAZAWA
;
Yasuhiro SHIGA
;
Shohei MINAMI
;
Seiji OHTORI
;
Koichi NAKAGAWA
Author Information
- Publication Type:Clinical Study
- From:Asian Spine Journal 2023;17(6):1066-1073
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Methods:Fifty-six patients (13 males and 43 females) with an average age of 80.2±9.2 years admitted to the hospital for FFS between 2006 and 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. The following patient data were collected using medical records: pain regions, a history of trauma, initial diagnoses, and rates of fracture detection using radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Results:Forty-one patients presented with low back and/or buttock pain, nine presented with groin pain, and 17 presented with thigh or leg pain. There was no history of trauma in 18 patients (32%). At the initial visit, 27 patients (48%) were diagnosed with sacral or pelvic fragility fractures. In contrast, 29 patients (52%) were initially misdiagnosed with lumbar spine disease (23 patients), hip joint diseases (three patients), and buttock bruises (three patients). Fracture detection rates for FFS were 2% using radiography, 71% using CT, and 93% using MRI. FFS was diagnosed definitively using an MRI with a coronal short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequence.
Conclusions:Some patients with FFS have leg pain with no history of trauma and are initially misdiagnosed as having lumbar spine disease, hip joint disease, or simple bruises. When these clinical symptoms are reported, we recommend considering FFS as one of the differential diagnoses and performing lumbar or pelvic MRIs, particularly coronal STIR images, to rule out FFS.
