↓ Skip to main content

Sacral Insufficiency Fractures are Common After High‐dose Radiation for Sacral Chordomas Treated With or Without Surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Sacral Insufficiency Fractures are Common After High‐dose Radiation for Sacral Chordomas Treated With or Without Surgery
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11999-015-4566-5
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Surgery with high-dose radiation and high-dose radiation alone for sacral chordomas have shown promising local control rates. However, we have noted frequent sacral insufficiency fractures and perceived this rate to be higher than previously reported. We wished (1) to characterize the incidence of sacral insufficiency fractures in patients with chordomas of the sacrum who received high-dose radiation, and (2) to determine whether patients treated with surgery plus high-dose radiation or high-dose radiation alone are more likely to experience a sacral fracture, and to compare time to fracture in these groups. Sixty-two patients who received high-dose radiation for sacral chordomas with (n = 44) or without surgical resection (n = 18) between 1992 and 2013 were included in this retrospective study. At our institution, sacral chordomas generally are treated by preoperative radiotherapy, followed by en bloc resection, and postoperative radiotherapy. Radiation alone, with an intent to cure, is offered to patients who otherwise are not good surgical candidates or patients who elect radiotherapy based on tumor location and the anticipated morbidity after surgery (such as sexual, bowel, or bladder dysfunction). MRI and CT scans were evaluated for evidence of sacral insufficiency fractures. Complete followup was available at a minimum of 2 years (or until fracture or death) for all 18 patients who underwent radiation alone, whereas 14% (six of 44 patients) in the surgery plus radiation group (9% [three of 33] after high sacrectomy and 27% [three of 11] after low sacrectomy) were lost to followup before 2 years. Sacral insufficiency fractures occurred in 29 of the 62 patients (47%). A total of 25 of 33 patients (76%) with high sacrectomy had fractures develop compared with zero of 11 (0%) after low sacrectomy, and four of the 18 patients (22%) who had high-dose radiation alone (p < 0.001). The fracture rate was greater in the high sacrectomy group than in the low sacrectomy group (p < 0.001) and the radiation only group (p < 0.001). There was no difference with the numbers evaluated in fracture probability between patients in the low-sacrectomy group and those treated with radiation alone (p = 0.112). The fracture-free survival probability was 0.99 for the low sacrectomy group at all times as there were no insufficiency fractures in this group; the 1-year fracture-free survival probability was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.35-0.69) after high sacrectomy, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.57-0.94) after radiation alone; the 2-year fracture-free survival probability was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.19-0.52) after high sacrectomy and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.50-0.91) after radiation alone; and the 5-year fracture-free survival probability was 0.14 (95% CI, 0.04-0.30) after high sacrectomy and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.50-0.91) after radiation alone. Acknowledging the limitations of potential differences in baseline and followup among treatment groups in our study, we found that almost ½ of our patients experienced an insufficiency fracture. We found that the fracture rate was greater in the surgery group compared with the radiation alone group and that high sacrectomy accounted for all fractures in the surgery group. These findings can be used to inform patients and also support the need for further research to elucidate the influence of high-dose radiation on bone quality. Level III, therapeutic study.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Other 5 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 43%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 15 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#27,763,431
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#7,250
of 9,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,864
of 311,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#70
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,309 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.