Osteoporosis‐related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first‐line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early post‐fracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be reevaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (eg, hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease). © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Objective. To evaluate the potential of viral interleukin-10 (vIL-10) gene therapy as an approach to prevent wear debris-induced inflammation, osteoclastogenesis, and bone resorption as it relates to periprosthetic osteolysis in patients with total joint replacements.Methods. Replication-defective adenovirus vectors expressing vIL-10 (AdvIL-10) or LacZ (AdLacZ) target genes were used to transduce fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) in vitro, and the effects of these cells on wear debris-induced proinflammatory cytokine production and receptor activator of nuclear factor B ligand ؉ macrophage colony-stimulating factor splenocyte osteoclastogenesis were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase assay. The effects of AdvIL-10 administration on wear debris-induced osteolysis in vivo were analyzed using the mouse calvaria model, in which AdLacZ was used as the control.Results. In the presence of AdLacZ-infected FLS, titanium particle-stimulated macrophages exhibited a marked increase in secretion of tumor necrosis factor ␣ (TNF␣) (6.5-fold), IL-6 (13-fold), and IL-1 (5-fold). Coculture with AdvIL-10-transduced FLS suppressed cytokine secretion to basal levels, while addition of an anti-IL-10 neutralizing antibody completely blocked this effect. The vIL-10-transduced FLS also inhibited osteoclastogenesis 10-fold in an anti-IL-10-sensitive manner. In vivo, titanium implantation resulted in a 2-fold increase in osteoclasts (P < 0.05) and in a 2-fold increase in sagittal suture area (P < 0.05). This increase over control levels was completely blocked in mice receiving intraperitoneal injections of AdvIL-10, all of whom had measurable serum vIL-10 levels for the duration of the experiment. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated reduced cyclooxygenase 2 and TNF␣ expression in AdvIL-10-infected animals.Conclusion. This study demonstrates that gene delivery of vIL-10 inhibits 3 processes critically involved in periprosthetic osteolysis: 1) wear debris-induced proinflammatory cytokine production, 2) osteoclastogenesis, and 3) osteolysis.

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early postfracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be re-evaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (e.g., hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease).

Osteoporosis-related fractures are undertreated, due in part to misinformation about recommended approaches to patient care and discrepancies among treatment guidelines. To help bridge this gap and improve patient outcomes, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research assembled a multistakeholder coalition to develop clinical recommendations for the optimal prevention of secondary fracture among people aged 65 years and older with a hip or vertebral fracture. The coalition developed 13 recommendations (7 primary and 6 secondary) strongly supported by the empirical literature. The coalition recommends increased communication with patients regarding fracture risk, mortality and morbidity outcomes, and fracture risk reduction. Risk assessment (including fall history) should occur at regular intervals with referral to physical and/or occupational therapy as appropriate. Oral, intravenous, and subcutaneous pharmacotherapies are efficacious and can reduce risk of future fracture. Patients need education, however, about the benefits and risks of both treatment and not receiving treatment. Oral bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate are first-line options and are generally well tolerated; otherwise, intravenous zoledronic acid and subcutaneous denosumab can be considered. Anabolic agents are expensive but may be beneficial for selected patients at high risk. Optimal duration of pharmacotherapy is unknown but because the risk for second fractures is highest in the early postfracture period, prompt treatment is recommended. Adequate dietary or supplemental vitamin D and calcium intake should be assured. Individuals being treated for osteoporosis should be re-evaluated for fracture risk routinely, including via patient education about osteoporosis and fractures and monitoring for adverse treatment effects. Patients should be strongly encouraged to avoid tobacco, consume alcohol in moderation at most, and engage in regular exercise and fall prevention strategies. Finally, referral to endocrinologists or other osteoporosis specialists may be warranted for individuals who experience repeated fracture or bone loss and those with complicating comorbidities (e.g., hyperparathyroidism, chronic kidney disease).

Background Two criteria that have been investigated for evaluating orthopedic surgery residency candidates are achieving an “honors” grade during a surgery clerkship and the total number of honors grades received in all clerkships. Unfortunately, the rate of honors grades given and the criteria for earning an honors grade differ between medical schools, making comparison of applicants from different medical schools difficult. Objective We measured the rate of honors grades in clerkships at different medical schools in the United States to examine the utility of clerkship grades in evaluating orthopedic surgery residency applicants. Methods Adequate data via the Electronic Residency Application Service were available for 86 of 142 Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools from the 2017 Match cycle. Descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were performed to identify differences in grade distributions within each clerkship and in school ranking for research by U.S. News & World Report. Results For the surgery clerkship, the median rate of honors grades given was 32.5% (range 5%–67%). There was a high rate of interinstitutional variability in all clerkships. We were unable to demonstrate a statistically significant relationship between research ranking and percentage honors grades given for individual clerkships. Conclusions A standardized method for grading medical students during clinical clerkships does not exist, resulting in a high degree of interinstitutional variability. Surgery clerkship grades are an unreliable measure for comparing orthopedic surgery residency applicants from different medical schools. Standardized measures of applicant evaluation might be helpful in the future.