Study Design:Expert opinion.Objectives:Osteoporotic vertebral fractures are of increasing medical importance. For an adequate treatment strategy, an easy and reliable classification is needed.Methods:The working group “Osteoporotic Fractures” of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU) has developed a classification system (OF classification) for osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures. The consensus decision followed an established pathway including review of the current literature.Results:The OF classification consists of 5 groups: OF 1, no vertebral deformation (vertebral edema); OF 2, deformation with no or minor (<1/5) involvement of the posterior wall; OF 3, deformation with distinct involvement (>1/5) of the posterior wall; OF 4, loss of integrity of the vertebral frame or vertebral body collapse or pincer-type fracture; OF 5, injuries with distraction or rotation. The interobserver reliability was substantial (κ = .63).Conclusions:The proposed OF classification is easy to use and provides superior clinical differentiation of the typical osteoporotic fracture morphologies.

Study Design:Prospective clinical cohort study (data collection); expert opinion (recommendation development).Objectives:Treatment options for nonsurgical and surgical management of osteoporotic vertebral body fractures are widely differing. Based on current literature, the knowledge of the experts, and their classification for osteoporotic fractures (OF classification) the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma has now introduced general treatment recommendations.Methods:a total of 707 clinical cases from 16 hospitals were evaluated. An OF classification–based score was developed to guide in the option of nonsurgical versus surgical management. For every classification type, differentiated treatment recommendations were deduced. Diagnostic prerequisites for reproducible treatment recommendations were defined: conventional X-rays with consecutive follow-up images (standing position whenever possible), magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography scan. OF classification allows for upgrading of fracture severity during the course of radiographic follow-up. The actual classification type is decisive for the score.Results:A score of less than 6 points advocates nonsurgical management; more than 6 points recommend surgical management. The primary goal of treatment is fast and painless mobilization. Because of expected comorbidities in this age group, minimally invasive procedures are being preferred. As a general rule, stability is more important than motion preservation. It is mandatory to restore the physiological loading capacity of the spine. If the patient was in a compensated unbalanced state at the time of fracture, reconstruction of the individual prefracture sagittal profile is sufficient. Instrumentation technique has to account for compromised bone quality. We recommend the use of cement augmentation or high purchase screws. The particular situations of injuries with neurological impairment; necessity to fuse; multiple level fractures; consecutive and adjacent fractures; fractures in ankylosing spondylitis are being addressed separately.Conclusions:The therapeutic recommendations presented here provide a reliable and reproducible basis to decide for treatment choices available. However, intermediate clinical situations remain with a score of 6 points allowing for both nonsurgical and surgical options. As a result, individualized treatment decisions may still be necessary. In the next step, the recommendations presented will be further evaluated in a multicenter controlled clinical trial.

Study Design:Abstract consensus paper with systematic literature review.Objective:The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for treatment of thoracolumbar spine fractures based on systematic review of current literature and consensus of several spine surgery experts.Methods:The project was initiated in September 2008 and published in Germany in 2011. It was redone in 2017 based on systematic literature review, including new AOSpine classification. Members of the expert group were recruited from all over Germany working in hospitals of all levels of care. In total, the consensus process included 9 meetings and 20 hours of video conferences.Results:As regards existing studies with highest level of evidence, a clear recommendation regarding treatment (operative vs conservative) or regarding type of surgery (posterior vs anterior vs combined anterior-posterior) cannot be given. Treatment has to be indicated individually based on clinical presentation, general condition of the patient, and radiological parameters. The following specific parameters have to be regarded and are proposed as morphological modifiers in addition to AOSpine classification: sagittal and coronal alignment of spine, degree of vertebral body destruction, stenosis of spinal canal, and intervertebral disc lesion. Meanwhile, the recommendations are used as standard algorithm in many German spine clinics and trauma centers.Conclusion:Clinical presentation and general condition of the patient are basic requirements for decision making. Additionally, treatment recommendations offer the physician a standardized, reproducible, and in Germany commonly accepted algorithm based on AOSpine classification and 4 morphological modifiers.

Study Design:Narrative review.Objective:To establish recommendations for the treatment of odontoid fractures based on current literature and the knowledge of the experts of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).Methods:Narrative review of the literature. Analyzing treatment algorithms of German trauma and spine centers as members of the Spine Section of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU).Results:There are many influencing factors leading to appropriate treatment of odontoid fractures such as age, bone quality, arthrosis, classification, and type of the fracture. Conservative nonoperative treatment is appropriate for stable undislocated displaced odontoid fractures. Anterior osteosynthesis with 1 or 2 screws leads to good results in the classical unstable type II odontoid fracture in patients with good bone quality. However, modifiers have been identified by the working group leading to higher complication and failure rates. For these cases, more stable constructs and/or posterior approaches are indicated.Conclusions:Operation seems to be standard treatment for odontoid fractures. However, in the aged population, conservative treatment should be considered as morbidity and mortality rise significantly in the group of >75 years. Conservative treatment may also be started within stable nondislocated fractures, but then regular controls have to be performed. If operation is indicated, many influencing factors have to be considered for appropriate approach and technique. The classification of Anderson and D’Alonzo is still standard. To create an adequate treatment algorithm, dislocation displacement and instability have to be identified. Stable odontoid fractures are treated conservatively non-operatively, but if so regular controls have to be performed. Unstable and/or dislocated displaced odontoid fractures are treated by anterior osteosynthesis with 1 or 2 screws. The technique is demanding and leads to elevated complication and failure rates if modifiers are apparent. In these cases, posterior instrumentation or fusion of C1 and C2 is favorable. In the aged population (>80 years), operative therapy is critical as postoperative morbidity complication and mortality rates rise significantly. As there is still some bias in the treatment algorithms, the working group recommends establishment of a prospective study to result in more objective statements.

This paper gives recommendations for treatment of thoracolumbar and lumbar spine injuries. The recommendations are based on the experience of the involved spine surgeons, who are part of a study group of the "Deutsche Gesellschaft für Unfallchirurgie" and a review of the current literature. Basics of diagnostic, conservative, and operative therapy are demonstrated. Fractures are evaluated by using morphologic criteria like destruction of the vertebral body, fragment dislocation, narrowing of the spinal canal, and deviation from the individual physiologic profile. Deviations from the individual sagittal profile are described by using the monosegmental or bisegmental end plate angle. The recommendations are developed for acute traumatic fractures in patients without severe osteoporotic disease.