Sacroiliac complex injuries are commonly seen in high-energy pelvic fractures. The injuries make a big difference in treatment patterns due to the diverse injury types, posing considerable challenges in formulating optimal treatment strategies, and hence are persistent clinical difficulties in orthopedic trauma. The clinical management of sacroiliac complex injuries presents several key challenges such as a non-negligible rate of missed diagnoses in associated vascular and visceral injuries, absence of standardized protocols for surgical approaches and reduction-fixation strategies across different injury patterns, and ongoing controversies regarding surgical indications and optimal timing for patients combined with concomitant lumbosacral plexus injuries. Currently, no systematic clinical guidelines are available for the diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac complex injuries both domestically and internationally. To this end, the Pelvic and Acetabular Surgery Group, Orthopedic Branch, China International Exchange and Promotive Association for Medical and Health Care and Orthopedic Physician Branch, Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized a panel of domestic experts in the field to develop the Clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac complex injuries ( version 2025), based on evidence-based medicine and adhering to the principles of scientific rigor, clinical applicability, and innovation. These guidelines provided 11 recommendations covering diagnosis, therapeutic principles and techniques, management protocols for lumbosacral plexus injuries, outcome evaluation, and postoperative rehabilitation pathways, etc., aiming to standardize the clinical management of sacroiliac complex injuries.

Sacroiliac complex injuries are commonly seen in high-energy pelvic fractures. The injuries make a big difference in treatment patterns due to the diverse injury types, posing considerable challenges in formulating optimal treatment strategies, and hence are persistent clinical difficulties in orthopedic trauma. The clinical management of sacroiliac complex injuries presents several key challenges such as a non-negligible rate of missed diagnoses in associated vascular and visceral injuries, absence of standardized protocols for surgical approaches and reduction-fixation strategies across different injury patterns, and ongoing controversies regarding surgical indications and optimal timing for patients combined with concomitant lumbosacral plexus injuries. Currently, no systematic clinical guidelines are available for the diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac complex injuries both domestically and internationally. To this end, the Pelvic and Acetabular Surgery Group, Orthopedic Branch, China International Exchange and Promotive Association for Medical and Health Care and Orthopedic Physician Branch, Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized a panel of domestic experts in the field to develop the Clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of sacroiliac complex injuries ( version 2025), based on evidence-based medicine and adhering to the principles of scientific rigor, clinical applicability, and innovation. These guidelines provided 11 recommendations covering diagnosis, therapeutic principles and techniques, management protocols for lumbosacral plexus injuries, outcome evaluation, and postoperative rehabilitation pathways, etc., aiming to standardize the clinical management of sacroiliac complex injuries.

Objective:To explore the surgical methods and treatment effects of adult anterior dislocation of the sacroiliac joint (AADSJ).Methods:A multi-center retrospective case series study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 25 cases admitted in 5 clinical centers (affiliations of authors in this article) from January 2016 to January 2021. There were 18 males and 7 females, aged 38.8±15.5 years (range, 18-83 years). The AADSJ clinical classification system was formulated based on the radiographic morphology of anterior dislocation of the sacroiliac joint, which includes two types. Type I: complete anterior dislocation of the sacroiliac joint, and displacement of the entire iliac auricular surface to the front of the sacrum. Type II: fracture of the sacroiliac joint combined with anterior dislocation, subdivided into 3 subtypes. Type IIa: iliac fracture involves the anterior 1/3 of the sacroiliac joint, and dislocation of the ilium anterior to the sacrum. Type IIb: iliac fracture involves the posterior 2/3 of the sacroiliac joint, and dislocation of the ilium anterior to the sacrum. Type IIc: iliac fracture involves the posterior 2/3 of the sacroiliac joint, and dislocation of the ilium anteromedial to the sacrum. The reliability and repeatability of the clinical classification, Tile classification and Young-Burgess classification were performed based on the results of two-phase assessments in four observers. The operations were performed by the lateral-rectus approach and the ilioinguinal approach. The operation time and intraoperative bleeding were recorded. Pelvic X-ray and CT scan were rechecked after the operation. The quality of fracture reduction was evaluated according to Matta score. The postoperative functional rehabilitation was evaluated according to the Majeed rehabilitation standard at one-year follow-up.Results:Among 25 cases in this study, there were 3 cases of Type I, 5 cases of Type IIa, 9 cases of Type IIb and 8 cases of Type IIc according to the clinical classification system. The Kappa values of reliability tests for the clinical classification, Tile classification and Young-Burgess classification were 0.681, 0.328 and 0.383, respectively. The Kappa values of repeatability tests for the clinical classification, Tile classification and Young-Burgess classification were 0.690, 0.221 and 0.395, respectively. The reliability and repeatability of the AADSJ clinical classification were significantly better than other classifications. There were 14 cases underwent lateral rectus abdominis approach and 11 cases underwent ilioinguinal approach. The operative time for managing anterior dislocation of the sacroiliac joint was 122.0±50.7 min (range, 65-148 min) through the lateral rectus abdominis approach, and through the ilioinguinal approach was 178.0±49.9 min (range, 110-270 min), with a significant difference ( t=2.76, P=0.011). The amount of intraoperative blood loss through the lateral rectus approach was 680±330 ml (range, 350-2,120 ml), which was significantly less than that through the ilioinguinal approach (1,660±968 ml, 680-3,300 ml), with a significant difference ( t=3.55, P=0.002). The follow-up period was 1-3 years. At one week after surgery, the quality of fracture reduction evaluated by Matta score showed that the excellent and good reduction rate of the lateral-rectus approach was 79% (11/14), and that of the ilioinguinal approach was 73% (11/14), with no statistically significant difference ( P=1.000). At a one-year follow-up, according to Majeed's criteria, the overall excellent and good rate of the lateral-rectus approach was 64% (9/14), which is similar to 64% (7/11) of that of the ilioinguinal approach. No fracture reduction loss or internal fixation loosening failure occurred. Conclusion:The AADSJ clinical classification system can accurately describe the imaging features and clinical manifestations of AADSJ, with high reliability and repeatability. The AADSJ can be treated by the lateral-rectus approach or the ilioinguinal approach, with similar therapeutic effects but the former having less trauma.

Objective:To investigate the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of TCF3-PBX1 fusion gene-positive childhood B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL).Methods:The clinical data of 1 287 newly diagnosed children with B-ALL who were admitted to five hospital in Fujian province (Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Zhangzhou Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou First Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University, Nanping First Hospital of Fujian Province) from April 2011 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the results of TCF3-PBX1 fusion gene testing, all the patients were divided into TCF3-PBX1-positive group and TCF3-PBX1-negative group. The clinical characteristics, early treatment response [minimal residual disease (MRD) at middle stage and end of induction chemotherapy] and long-term efficacy [overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS)] of the patients in both groups were compared. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. The prognostic factors of TCF3-PBX1-positive B-ALL were analyzed by using Cox proportional hazards model. Among 83 children with TCF3-PBX1-positive B-ALL, the treatment regimens, risk stratification and efficacy evaluation of 62 cases were performed by using Chinese Children's Leukemia Group (CCLG)-ALL 2008 regimen and 21 cases were performed by using Chinese Children's Cancer Group (CCCG)-ALL 2015 regimen, and the efficacy and incidence of serious adverse events (SAE) between the two groups compared.Results:Among 1 287 B-ALL patients, 83 patients (6.4%) were TCF3-PBX1-positive. The proportion of patients with initial white blood cell count (WBC)≥50×10 9/L in the TCF3-PBX1-positive group was higher than that in the TCF3-PBX1-negative group, while the proportions of patients with MRD ≥1% on induction chemotherapy day 15 or day 19, and MRD ≥0.01% on induction chemotherapy day 33 or day 46 in the TCF3-PBX1-positive group were lower than those in the TCF3-PBX1-negative group (all P < 0.05). Univariate Cox regression analysis showed that MRD ≥1% on induction chemotherapy day 15 or day 19 and TCF3-PBX1 ≥0.01% on induction chemotherapy day 33 or day 46 were risk factors for OS and EFS (all P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that MRD ≥1% on induction chemotherapy day 15 or day 19 was an independent risk factor for OS ( HR = 10.589, 95% CI 1.903-58.933, P = 0.007) and EFS ( HR = 10.218, 95% CI 2.429-42.980, P = 0.002). TCF3-PBX1≥0.01% on induction chemotherapy day 33 or day 46 was an independent risk factor for EFS ( HR = 6.058, 95% CI 1.463-25.087, P = 0.013) but not for OS ( HR = 3.550, 95% CI 0.736-17.121, P = 0.115). The 10-year EFS and OS rates of the TCF3-PBX1-positive group were 84.6% (95% CI 76.9%-93.1%) and 89.1% (95% CI 82.1%-96.6%), and the differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (both P > 0.05). Among 80 children who received standardized treatment, compared with children who were treated with CCLG-ALL 2008 regimen, the incidence of infection-related SAE was lower in children who were treated with CCCG-ALL 2015 regimen [0 (0/21) vs. 20.3% (12/59), χ2 = 5.22, P = 0.022], but there were no statistical differences in treatment-related mortality, relapse rate, EFS and OS between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Conclusions:Children with TCF3-PBX1-positive B-ALL have a good prognosis, and MRD≥1% at middle stage of induction chemotherapy and TCF3-PBX1≥0.01% at the end of induction chemotherapy may be influencing factors for poor prognosis. CCCG-ALL 2015 regimen can reduce infection-related SAE while achieving good efficacy.

Accurate classification of the acetabular injuries and appropriate treatment plan are great challenges for orthopedic surgeons because of the irregular anatomical structure of the acetabulum and aggregation of important vessels and nerves around it. Letournel-Judet classification system has been widely applied to classify acetabular fractures. However, there are several limitations, including incomplete inclusion of fracture types, difficulty in understanding and insufficient guidance for surgical treatment, etc. Serious complications such as traumatic arthritis are common due to wrong classification and diagnosis and improper selection of surgical strategy, which brings a heavy burden to the society and families. Three-column classification, based on anatomic characteristics, has advantages of containing more fracture types and being easy to understand, etc. To solve the problems existing in the diagnosis and treatment process based on Letournel-Judet classification, achieve accurate diagnosis and treatment of patients with acetabular fractures, and obtain satisfactory prognosis, the Orthopedic Trauma Emergency Center of Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University and the Trauma Orthopedic Branch of the Chinese Orthopedic Association organized experts from relevant fields to formulate the Expert consensus on the accurate diagnosis and treatment of acetabular fractures based on three-column classification ( version 2023) in terms of principles of evidence-based medicine. Based on the three-column classification, 15 recommendations were proposed, covering the diagnosis, treatment, complication prevention and management, etc, so as to provide reference for accurate diagnosis and treatment of acetabular fractures.