Robot Assisted Minimally Invasive Treatment Versus Conservative Treatment for Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis Type 1-2 in Elderly Patients (FFP)
Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Robot Assisted Minimally Invasive Treatment Versus Conservative Treatment in Elderly Patients With FFP1-2 Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis
Descripción general del estudio
Estado
Condiciones
Intervención / Tratamiento
Descripción detallada
This study is a prospective, single center, stratified randomized controlled trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of robot assisted minimally invasive treatment versus conservative treatment in elderly patients with FFP1-2 fragility fractures of the pelvis.
A total of 152 patients will be enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the robot assisted minimally invasive treatment group or the conservative treatment group. Randomization will be stratified according to FFP classification (FFP1 or FFP2) using a computer generated randomization sequence.
Eligible participants include patients aged 60 years or older diagnosed with osteoporosis related FFP1 or FFP2 pelvic fragility fractures caused by low energy trauma. The primary objective is to compare pain control, early weight bearing, functional recovery, fracture progression, venous thromboembolism events, and healthcare resource utilization between treatment strategies.
Patients in the robot assisted treatment group will undergo robot assisted minimally invasive pelvic fixation, while patients in the conservative treatment group will receive standardized nonoperative management including pain control, anticoagulation prophylaxis, rehabilitation, and osteoporosis treatment.
Outcome measures include pain scores, Majeed pelvic function score, EQ 5D, SMFA, imaging evaluation of fracture progression and healing, venous thromboembolism events, laboratory parameters, muscle mass changes, bone mineral density, opioid consumption, complications, and healthcare costs. Follow up assessments will be performed at postoperative day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year.
The results of this study may provide evidence regarding the optimal treatment strategy for elderly patients with FFP1-2 pelvic fragility fractures.
Tipo de estudio
Inscripción (Estimado)
Fase
- No aplica
Contactos y Ubicaciones
Estudio Contacto
- Nombre: Junbo Liang
- Número de teléfono: 0576-85190463
- Correo electrónico: liangjb@enzemed.com
Criterios de participación
Criterio de elegibilidad
Edades elegibles para estudiar
- Adulto
- Adulto Mayor
Acepta Voluntarios Saludables
Descripción
Inclusion Criteria:
Age ≥ 60 years Low energy trauma Diagnosis of osteoporosis Diagnosis of FFP1 or FFP2 fragility fractures of the pelvis Injury duration less than 3 weeks Ability to walk independently or with assistance before injury Ability to provide written informed consent
Exclusion Criteria:
Severe open injury or skin infection at the surgical site Long term bedridden status or severe disability Severe psychiatric disorders or dementia Severe obesity affecting imaging quality Severe systemic diseases preventing surgery Pathological fracture Current chemotherapy, radiotherapy, systemic corticosteroid therapy, or growth factor therapy
Plan de estudios
¿Cómo está diseñado el estudio?
Detalles de diseño
- Propósito principal: Tratamiento
- Asignación: Aleatorizado
- Modelo Intervencionista: Asignación paralela
- Enmascaramiento: Doble
Armas e Intervenciones
Grupo de participantes/brazo |
Intervención / Tratamiento |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Robot Assisted Minimally Invasive Treatment Group
Participants undergo robot assisted minimally invasive fixation for FFP1-2 fragility fractures of the pelvis.
|
Robot assisted minimally invasive fixation is performed using robotic navigation assisted percutaneous screw placement for stabilization of pelvic fragility fractures.
|
|
Comparador activo: Conservative Treatment Group
Participants receive standardized conservative treatment including pain management, rehabilitation, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and osteoporosis treatment.
|
Robot assisted minimally invasive fixation is performed using robotic navigation assisted percutaneous screw placement for stabilization of pelvic fragility fractures.
|
¿Qué mide el estudio?
Medidas de resultado primarias
Medida de resultado |
Medida Descripción |
Periodo de tiempo |
|---|---|---|
|
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain
Periodo de tiempo: At day 1, day 2, day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain.
Scores range from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates the worst imaginable pain.
Higher scores indicate worse pain severity.
|
At day 1, day 2, day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
Majeed Pelvic Function Score
Periodo de tiempo: At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Medidas de resultado secundarias
Medida de resultado |
Medida Descripción |
Periodo de tiempo |
|---|---|---|
|
EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Level Questionnaire
Periodo de tiempo: At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
|
Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA)
Periodo de tiempo: At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
|
Fracture Progression and Healing
Periodo de tiempo: At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Assessment of fracture healing, secondary displacement, and FFP classification progression using pelvic CT.
|
At day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
complication
Periodo de tiempo: From treatment initiation to 1 year follow up
|
Assessment of complication events during follow up.
|
From treatment initiation to 1 year follow up
|
|
Opioid Consumption
Periodo de tiempo: Days 0-3 after treatment
|
Assessment of cumulative opioid consumption during hospitalization
|
Days 0-3 after treatment
|
|
Serum C-Reactive Protein Level
Periodo de tiempo: Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
|
D-Dimer Level
Periodo de tiempo: Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
|
|
Hemoglobin Level
Periodo de tiempo: Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Preoperatively and at day 3, 2 weeks, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after treatment
|
Colaboradores e Investigadores
Patrocinador
Publicaciones y enlaces útiles
Publicaciones Generales
- Zong Y, Li J, Li Z, Wang W. Minimally invasive surgery and conservative treatment achieve similar clinical outcomes in patients with type II fragility fractures of the pelvis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2025 Feb 27;20(1):210. doi: 10.1186/s13018-025-05581-x.
- Haentjens P, Magaziner J, Colon-Emeric CS, Vanderschueren D, Milisen K, Velkeniers B, Boonen S. Meta-analysis: excess mortality after hip fracture among older women and men. Ann Intern Med. 2010 Mar 16;152(6):380-90. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-6-201003160-00008.
- Banierink H, Ten Duis K, de Vries R, Wendt K, Heineman E, Reininga I, IJpma F. Pelvic ring injury in the elderly: Fragile patients with substantial mortality rates and long-term physical impairment. PLoS One. 2019 May 28;14(5):e0216809. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216809. eCollection 2019.
- Yamamoto N, Someko H, Nakashima Y, Nakao S, Kaneko T, Tsuge T. Mortality following fragility fractures of the pelvis: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Injury. 2025 Oct;56(10):112618. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2025.112618. Epub 2025 Jul 21.
- Nakayama Y, Suzuki T, Kurozumi T, Watanabe Y. Progression to Rommens type IIIa fragility fracture of the pelvis managed by delayed open reduction and interdigitating screw fixation: A case report. Trauma Case Rep. 2023 Jan 13;43:100773. doi: 10.1016/j.tcr.2023.100773. eCollection 2023 Feb.
- Rommens PM, Arand C, Hopf JC, Mehling I, Dietz SO, Wagner D. Progress of instability in fragility fractures of the pelvis: An observational study. Injury. 2019 Nov;50(11):1966-1973. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.08.038. Epub 2019 Aug 27.
- Jiang Y, Qi X, Cui H, Huang Y, Lv Y, Yang Y, Yao X, Yang D. The Inflammation-Energy Metabolism Axis: A Central Driver of Sarcopenia-Osteoporosis: A Narrative Review. Calcif Tissue Int. 2026 Jan 7;117(1):9. doi: 10.1007/s00223-025-01473-8.
- Lin YH, Shih YT, Teng MMH. The Impact of the "Osteo" Component of Osteosarcopenia on Fragility Fractures in Post-Menopausal Women. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 May 17;22(10):5256. doi: 10.3390/ijms22105256.
- Meermans G, van Egmond JC. Malnutrition in Older Hip Fracture Patients: Prevalence, Pathophysiology, Clinical Outcomes, and Treatment-A Systematic Review. J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 11;14(16):5662. doi: 10.3390/jcm14165662.
- Rommens PM, Arand C, Hofmann A, Wagner D. When and How to Operate Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis? Indian J Orthop. 2019 Jan-Feb;53(1):128-137. doi: 10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_631_17.
- Ali KA, He L, Li W, Zhang W, Huang H. Sleep quality and psychological health in patients with pelvic and acetabulum fractures: a cross-sectional study. BMC Geriatr. 2024 Apr 4;24(1):314. doi: 10.1186/s12877-024-04929-y.
- Hutchings L, Roffey DM, Lefaivre KA. Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis: Current Practices and Future Directions. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2022 Dec;20(6):469-477. doi: 10.1007/s11914-022-00760-9. Epub 2022 Nov 7.
- GBD 2019 Fracture Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of bone fractures in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2021 Sep;2(9):e580-e592. doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00172-0.
Fechas de registro del estudio
Fechas importantes del estudio
Inicio del estudio (Estimado)
Finalización primaria (Estimado)
Finalización del estudio (Estimado)
Fechas de registro del estudio
Enviado por primera vez
Primero enviado que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad
Publicado por primera vez (Actual)
Actualizaciones de registros de estudio
Última actualización publicada (Actual)
Última actualización enviada que cumplió con los criterios de control de calidad
Última verificación
Más información
Términos relacionados con este estudio
Otros números de identificación del estudio
- K20260153
Plan de datos de participantes individuales (IPD)
¿Planea compartir datos de participantes individuales (IPD)?
Información sobre medicamentos y dispositivos, documentos del estudio
Estudia un producto farmacéutico regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.
Estudia un producto de dispositivo regulado por la FDA de EE. UU.
Esta información se obtuvo directamente del sitio web clinicaltrials.gov sin cambios. Si tiene alguna solicitud para cambiar, eliminar o actualizar los detalles de su estudio, comuníquese con register@clinicaltrials.gov. Tan pronto como se implemente un cambio en clinicaltrials.gov, también se actualizará automáticamente en nuestro sitio web. .