Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pelvic Fractures – Part 1: Which Criteria Lead Us to Supplementary MRI Diagnostics?

Abstract

Introduction Isolated pelvic fractures are relatively rare with an incidence of 3 – 6% of all fractures, but their incidence in polytraumatized individuals increases to 25%. The S3 guideline Polytrauma gives a clear recommendation for diagnostics by means of pelvic radiography (X-ray) and computed tomography (CT). A recommendation for the diagnosis by means of magnetic resonance tomography (MRI) especially in patients with low energetic/missing trauma does not currently exist. It is unclear on the basis of which criteria the MRI can be indicated in pelvic fractures. The aim of our study was therefore to retrospectively record indications for the indication of MRI in pelvic fractures – with adequate as well as inadequate trauma.

Material and Methods In a retrospective clinical study, a total of 140 patients (median 68 years, range 15 – 97, 75 female, and 66 male) with a pelvic fracture were included in the study over a period of three years. Overall, the trauma mechanism revealed 73 adequate and 67 inadequate fractures. 31/140 patients had undergone MRI of the pelvis in addition to a CT/X-ray scan. The two subgroups “with MRI” and “without MRI” were analyzed with regard to the parameters “sex”, “age”, “adequacy of the trauma”, “fracture localization”, “duration of admission to imaging”, “type of therapy” and “duration to surgery” compared.

Results It was shown that the MRI diagnosis was performed especially in female, elderly patients (81 years, range 19 – 94 years). Patients with inappropriate trauma have received MRI more frequently (74%) than patients with adequate trauma (26%). With regard to fracture localization no differences could be shown. The MRI was performed on a median 4 days after the CT examination. Regarding the decision “conservative” vs. “operationally” our two groups without and with MRT tended to differ not. Patients with MRI were operated on median 2 days later than patients who did not receive MRI.

Conclusions Pelvic fracture MRI should be performed primarily in elderly female patients without adequate trauma. In patients with adequate trauma, MRI is of low value, especially as MRI diagnostics are performed with delay, resulting in later surgery.

Key words

pelvic fractures - MRI - CT - imaging - epidemiology

Publication History

Article published online:
18 September 2019

• References/Literatur

• 1 Beckmann N, Cai C. CT characteristics of traumatic sacral fractures in association with pelvic ring injuries: correlation using the Young-Burgess classification system. Emerg Radiol 2017; 24: 255-262
• 2 Böhme J, Höch A, Josten C. Osteoporotische Frakturen des Beckens. Chirurg 2012; 83: 875-881
• 3 Buller LT, Best MJ, Quinnan SM. A nationwide analysis of pelvic ring fractures: incidence and trends in treatment, length of stay, and mortality. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 2016; 7: 9-17
• 4 Senst W, Bida B. Begutachtung von Beckenverletzungen. Zentralbl Chir 2000; 125: 737-743
• 5 Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS. et al. Fracture and Dislocation Classification Compendium-2018. J Orthop Trauma 2018; 32 (Suppl. 01) S1-S170
• 6 Wedegärtner U, Gatzka C, Rueger JM. et al. Multislice CT (MSCT) in der Detektion und Klassifikation von Becken- und Azetabulumfrakturen. Rofo 2003; 175 (01) 105-111
• 7 Pfeilschifter J, Cooper C, Watts NB. et al. Regional and age-related variations in the proportions of hip fractures and major fractures among postmenopausal women: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women. Osteoporos Int 2012; 23: 2179-2188
• 8 Culemann U, Scola A, Tosounidis G. et al. Versorgungskonzept der Beckenringverletzung des alten Patienten. Unfallchirurg 2010; 113: 258-271
• 9 Rommens PM, Hofmann A. Comprehensive classification of fragility fractures of the pelvic ring: recommendations for surgical treatment. Injury 2013; 44: 1733-1734
• 10 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie. Hrsg. S3-Leitlinie Polytrauma/Schwerverletzten-Behandlung. AWMF Register-Nr. 012/019. 07/2016 Im Internet (Stand: 29.01.2019): http://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/012-019l_S3_Polytrauma_Schwerverletzten-Behandlung_2017-08.pdf
• 11 Kessel B, Sevi R, Jeroukhimov I. et al. Is routine portable pelvic X-ray in stable multiple trauma patients always justified in a high technology era?. Injury 2007; 38: 559-563
• 12 Pehle B, Nast-Kolb D, Oberbeck R. et al. Wertigkeit der körperlichen und radiologischen Basisdiagnostik des Beckens in der Schockraumbehandlung. Unfallchirurg 2003; 106: 642-648
• 13 Hackenbroch C, Riesner HJ, Lang P. et al. Die Dual-Energy-CT als neue Technik zur Diagnostik von Insuffizienzfrakturen des Beckens. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 27-34
• 14 Judet R, Judet J, Letournel E. Fractures of the acetabulum: classification and surgical approaches for open reduction. Preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1964; 46: 1615-1646
• 15 Böhme J, Höch A, Boldt A. et al. Einfluss der Standard-Computertomografie hinsichtlich Frakturklassifikation und Therapie von Beckenringfrakturen bei Patienten über dem 65. Lebensjahr. Z Orthop Unfall 2012; 150: 477-483
• 16 Stuby FM, Schäffler A, Haas T. et al. Insuffizienzfrakturen des Beckenrings. Unfallchirurg 2013; 116: 351-364
• 17 Cabarrus MC, Ambekar A, Lu Y. et al. MRI and CT of insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and the proximal femur. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 995-1001
• 18 Hackenbroch C, Riesner HJ, Lang P. et al. Die Dual-Energy-Computertomografie in der muskuloskeletalen Radiologie mit Fokus auf Insuffizienzfrakturen des Beckens. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 708-715
• 19 Henes FO, Nüchtern JV, Groth M. et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Multidetector Computed Tomography in the detection of pelvic fractures. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 2337-2342
• 20 Lyders EM, Whitlow CT, Baker MD. et al. Imaging and treatment of sacral insufficiency fractures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010; 31: 201-210
• 21 Arduini M, Saturnino L, Piperno A. et al. Fragility fractures of the pelvis: treatment and preliminary results. Aging Clin Exp Res 2015; 27 (Suppl. 01) S61-S67
• 22 Tosounidis G, Holstein JH, Culemann U. et al. Changes in epidemiology and treatment of pelvic ring fractures in Germany: an analysis on data of German Pelvic Multicenter Study Groups I and III (DGU/AO). Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2010; 77: 450-456
• 23 Holstein JH, Stuby FM, Herath SC. et al. Einfluss des Beckenregisters der DGU auf die Versorgung von Beckenringfrakturen. Unfallchirurg 2016; 119: 475-481
• 24 Rollmann MF, Herath SC, Kirchhoff F. et al. Pelvic ring fractures in the elderly now and then – a pelvic registry study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2017; 71: 83-88
• 25 Gänsslen A, Pohlemann T, Paul C. et al. Epidemiology of pelvic ring injuries. Injury 1996; 27 (Suppl. 01) S13-S20
• 26 Mayer SW, Stewart JR, Fadell MF. et al. MRI as a reliable and accurate method for assessment of posterior hip dislocation in children and adolescents without the risk of radiation exposure. Pediatr Radiol 2015; 45: 1355-1362
• 27 Scheinfeld MH, Dym AA, Spektor M. et al. Acetabular fractures: what radiologists should know and how 3D CT can aid classification. Radiographics 2015; 35: 555-577
• 28 Nüchtern JV, Hartel MJ, Henes FO. et al. Significance of clinical examination, CT and MRI scan in the diagnosis of posterior pelvic ring fractures. Injury 2015; 46: 315-319
• 29 Cabarrus MC, Ambekar A, Lu Y. et al. MRI and CT of insufficiency fractures of the pelvis and the proximal femur. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 995-1001
• 30 Fuchs T, Rottbeck U, Hofbauer V. et al. Beckenringfrakturen im Alter. Unfallchirurg 2011; 114: 663-670
• 31 Matcuk jr. GR, Mahanty SR, Skalski MR. et al. Stress fractures: pathophysiology, clinical presentation, imaging features, and treatment options. Emerg Radiol 2016; 23: 365-375
• 32 Merz C, Hackenbroch C, Palm HG. et al. Die Kernspintomografie bei Beckenfrakturen – Teil 2: Informationszugewinn und klinische Therapierelevanz. Z Orthop Unfall 2019; 157 DOI: 10.1055/a-0965-7686.