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
研究概览
详细说明
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.
研究类型
注册 (估计的)
阶段
- 不适用
联系人和位置
学习联系方式
- 姓名：Junbo Liang
- 电话号码：0576-85190463
- 邮箱：liangjb@enzemed.com
参与标准
资格标准
适合学习的年龄
- 成人
- 年长者
接受健康志愿者
描述
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
学习计划
研究是如何设计的？
设计细节
- 主要用途：治疗
- 分配：随机化
- 介入模型：并行分配
- 屏蔽：双倍的
武器和干预
参与者组/臂 |
干预/治疗 |
|---|---|
|
实验性的：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.
|
|
有源比较器：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.
|
研究衡量的是什么？
主要结果指标
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain
大体时间：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
大体时间：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
|
次要结果测量
结果测量 |
措施说明 |
大体时间 |
|---|---|---|
|
EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Level Questionnaire
大体时间：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)
大体时间：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
大体时间：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
大体时间：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
大体时间：Days 0-3 after treatment
|
Assessment of cumulative opioid consumption during hospitalization
|
Days 0-3 after treatment
|
|
Serum C-Reactive Protein Level
大体时间：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
大体时间：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
大体时间：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
|
合作者和调查者
赞助
出版物和有用的链接
一般刊物
- 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.
研究记录日期
研究主要日期
学习开始 (估计的)
初级完成 (估计的)
研究完成 (估计的)
研究注册日期
首次提交
首先提交符合 QC 标准的
首次发布 (实际的)
研究记录更新
最后更新发布 (实际的)
上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新
最后验证
更多信息
与本研究相关的术语
其他研究编号
- K20260153
计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)
计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)？
药物和器械信息、研究文件
研究美国 FDA 监管的药品
研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品
此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索，没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求，请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改，我们的网站上也会自动更新.