Loading [Contrib]/a11y/accessibility-menu.js
Skip to main content
null
J Orthopaedic Experience & Innovation
  • Menu
  • Articles
    • Brief Report
    • Case Report
    • Data Paper
    • Editorial
    • Meeting Reports/Abstracts
    • Methods Article
    • Product Review
    • Research Article
    • Review Article
    • Review Articles
    • Systematic Review
    • All
  • For Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • About
  • Issues
  • Blog
  • "Open Mic" Topic Sessions
  • Advertisers
  • Recorded Content
  • CME
  • JOEI KOL Connect
  • search

RSS Feed

Enter the URL below into your favorite RSS reader.

https://journaloei.scholasticahq.com/feed
Research Article
Vol. 6, Issue 2, 2025September 14, 2025 EDT

The Use of Curved Implants in Pelvic Ring Surgery – Early Positive Outcomes of a Multi-center Experience

Dainn Woo, MD, Bijan Dehghani, MD, Rown Parola, MD, James Stannard, MD, Caleb Bischoff, DO, Brett Crist, MD, Matthew Gardner, MD, Derek Donegan, MD, Samir Mehta, MD,
pelvic ring injuryflexible fixationearly outcomespercutaneous pelvic fixation
Copyright Logoccby-nc-nd-4.0 • https://doi.org/10.60118/001c.138886
J Orthopaedic Experience & Innovation
Woo, Dainn, Bijan Dehghani, Rown Parola, James Stannard, Caleb Bischoff, Brett Crist, Matthew Gardner, Derek Donegan, and Samir Mehta. 2025. “The Use of Curved Implants in Pelvic Ring Surgery – Early Positive Outcomes of a Multi-Center Experience.” Journal of Orthopaedic Experience & Innovation 6 (2). https:/​/​doi.org/​10.60118/​001c.138886.
Save article as...▾
Download all (3)
  • Figure 1. Steerable guidewire finding intraosseous path through S1.
    Download
  • Figure 2. Exchange tube placed over steerable guidewire.
    Download
  • Figure 3. S1 Trans-sacral trans-iliac CurvaFix, Standard S2 Transsacral trans-iliac cannulated screw with washer.
    Download

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

If this problem reoccurs, please contact Scholastica Support

Error message:

undefined

View more stats

Abstract

Purpose

The goals of operative stabilization for pelvic ring injuries include restoration of the bony anatomy, early mobilization, and resuscitation. Percutaneous screw fixation of pelvic fractures can be challenging due to variability in pelvic morphology. Recent advances in surgical technique and implants offer flexible implants to traverse the non-linear osseous fixation paths in the pelvis, which can then be made rigid by activating a locking mechanism. In this study we describe the indications, perioperative and postoperative outcomes, and complications in a series of patients with pelvic ring and acetabular fractures treated with a flexible implant.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients at three Level 1 trauma centers treated with flexible intramedullary fixation for pelvic ring and acetabular fractures was performed. Patient demographics, mechanism of injury, fracture pattern, associated injuries, operative time, blood loss, perioperative complications, post-hospitalization disposition, and weightbearing status were recorded.

Results

111 patients from three Level 1 trauma centers were included, 99 patients followed up in clinic. Follow-up periods ranged from 10 to 126 weeks. Mean age at surgery was 64.8 years (range 21-101). 67 patients were female (60.5%). 81.1% of patients were white, 8.1% black, and 12 declined to respond. 60 (54.1%) pelvic fractures resulted from a low energy mechanism and 51 (45.9%) from a high energy mechanism. 47 (42.3%) patients had additional injuries. The most common injury patterns were LC1 (25%) and LC2 (23%). Operative time ranged from 22 to 403 minutes, averaging 101.5 minutes. Mean EBL was 151ccs. Mean length of stay was 11 days. 90 (81.1%) patients were made weightbearing as tolerated postoperatively. 34% of patients were discharged home, 65% to inpatient rehab. There were 4 intraoperative (2 mal-positioned implants, 1 broken implant, 1 bladder rupture) and 6 postoperative complications (2 nerve palsies, 1 wound breakdown, 2 infections, 1 nonunion). 51 (45.9%) patients were walking unassisted, 11 (9.9%) with a cane, and 29 (26.1%) with a walker at their last follow-up.

Conclusion

Patients treated with flexible intraosseous fixation for pelvic ring and acetabular fractures had less than a 10% complication rate across three Level 1 trauma centers. Immediate full weight bearing in these complex injury patterns is safe with limited concern for implant failure or need for revision surgery when utilizing a flexible implant following the patient’s osseous fixation pathways.

Introduction

Fractures of the pelvic ring are a relatively common injury, accounting for about 2%-8% of all fractures (Grotz et al. 2005; Hu et al. 2023; Buller, Best, and Quinnan 2016; Pohlemann et al. 1996). These injuries may result from high-energy mechanism such as motor vehicle accidents or may present as insufficiency injuries in the setting of low energy mechanisms in the elderly and osteoporotic population (Hu et al. 2023; Bishop and Routt 2012). When indicated for operative stabilization, the primary goal for management of unstable pelvic ring injuries is early mobilization with minimal iatrogenic insult to the soft tissue (Bishop and Routt 2012).

Surgical techniques for stabilizing pelvic ring injuries include open reduction and internal fixation or percutaneous fixation, with an increasing trend toward the latter (Gire et al. 2018) which offers several benefits including shorter operative time, lower blood loss (Abou-Khalil et al. 2020), and lower infection risk. Despite lack of direct visualization, studies have demonstrated that percutaneous pelvic fixation achieves similar reduction quality as open procedures (Lindsay, Tornetta, Diwan, et al. 2016; Pearson et al. 2018). One of the challenges of percutaneous pelvic fixation is addressing the variability in pelvic morphology among patients (A. N. Miller and Routt 2012). Sacral dysmorphism, described in almost half the adult population (Wu et al. 2009), may complicate techniques for posterior pelvic ring fixation. For instance, the narrow and angled osseous corridors of the upper sacral segment in a dysmorphic pelvis increase the risk of cortical perforation and make a straight trajectory for a trans-sacral trans-iliac screw unfeasible (Kaiser et al. 2014).

Recent advances in surgical technique and implants have allowed for minimally invasive, percutaneous stabilization of the pelvis utilizing the concept of osseous fixation paths (Langford et al. 2013). Despite these advances, percutaneous stabilization of the pelvis continues to pose a significant challenge for surgeons due to variability in pelvic morphology (Pohlemann et al. 1996; Conflitti, Graves, and Chip Routt 2010). A novel implant aimed to alleviate this challenge is a flexible intramedullary device that once in position, can be locked rigidly (CurvaFix® Intramedullary Implant, CurvaFix, Bellevue, WA) (Zakariaee et al. 2016). In this study, we present a case series of patients at three level 1 trauma centers who underwent pelvic ring stabilization with the CurvaFix flexible intramedullary stabilization device.

Methods

Study Population and Setting

This was a retrospective case series of patients treated with flexible intramedullary fixation for pelvic ring and acetabular fractures at each of three level 1 trauma centers from 2021 to 2023. The flexible intramedullary technology used is an FDA 501k approved device for pelvic fixation. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for the study at each participating institution prior to data collection. Patients who underwent surgery with flexible intramedullary fixation for pelvic fractures were recorded into an internal database at each institution. Data use agreements between institutions allowed compilation of de-identified patient data for analysis. Standardized perioperative and postoperative variables were recorded.

Data Collection

All patients treated with flexible intramedullary fixation for pelvic ring and acetabular fractures between January 2021 and December 2023 were included. The data cutoff for additional patient inclusion was December 31st, 2023. Cases where flexible intramedullary fixation was aborted in favor of alternative methods of fixation were excluded. Pelvic ring fixation was occasionally performed in conjunction with other surgical procedures for additional injuries, which were also noted in the database.

Data was collected from each institution’s electronic medical records by a designated research assistant or coordinator. Variables collected for analysis included injury mechanism, high or low-energy trauma, additional orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic injuries, pelvic fracture pattern, surgical procedure(s), total operative time, estimated blood loss, any additional procedures performed in the same case, postoperative weightbearing protocol, postoperative DVT prophylaxis, length of hospitalization, postoperative complications, disposition after hospitalization (home, rehab, nursing facility), weightbearing status at follow-up, death, and cause of death. Postoperative follow up protocol was determined by the operating surgeon at each institution.

Study Definitions

Injury mechanisms were subcategorized into high energy or low energy. The latter was defined as fragility or insufficiency fractures that occurred following an event which would otherwise not be expected to result in a fracture, such as ground level falls or transfers.

Pelvic ring injury patterns consisted of sacral fractures including H or U type patterns associated with spinopelvic dissociation, pubic rami and root fractures, pubic symphyseal widening, iliac crest fractures, and sacroiliac (SI) joint injuries. The Young-Burgess classification was used to describe lateral compression, anterior-posterior compression, and vertical shear pattern injuries; however several patients presented with a combined pattern (Burgess, Eastridge, Young, et al. 1990). Weightbearing status after surgery was defined as the maximum allowed weight bearing determined by the surgeon.

Postoperative follow-up visits were recorded in weeks from the surgical date. Complications included any adverse event that occurred in the postoperative follow up period related to the surgery. Weightbearing status at follow-up was defined as the weightbearing capability of the patient at the time of follow-up regardless of postoperative weightbearing status allowed by the surgeon. For instance, if a patient was made weightbearing as tolerated (WBAT) on bilateral lower extremities postoperatively but presented to clinic with a walker, weight bearing status at follow up would be recorded as WBAT with assistive device (walker).

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were utilized to summarize the data in this case series. Sub-analyses were performed based on injury mechanism and fracture pattern. All analyses were performed by SPSS (IBM Corp. Released 2023. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 29.0.2.0 Armonk, NY: IBM Corp).

Conflicts of Interest

The surgeries included in this study were performed by four surgeons at three institutions, three of which were consultants for the device manufacturer, and three who were part of the surgeon advisory board.

Surgical Technique

The following surgical technique describes placement of a trans-sacral trans-iliac flexible device at the upper sacral segment (S1).

Flexible intramedullary fixaiton was performed using the CurvaFix IM System (CurvaFix Inc, Bellevue, WA). The implants is available in 7.5mm and 9.5mm diameters, with length ranging from 90mm to 180mm.

The patient is positioned supine on a flat-top radiolucent table with a sacral bump to allow for clearance of the surgical table with instrumentation and adequate posterior access. The surgical field is prepped and widely squared off from the inferior border of the sternum to the mons pubis and inguinal folds with sterile towels followed by a sheet of iodine impregnated antimicrobial dressing (Ioban, 3M, Saint Paul, MN).

The greater trochanter and the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) are palpated as landmarks. A horizontal line is drawn in line with the femoral shaft, and a second line a drawn perpendicular to the first from the ASIS straight down to the table to form quadrants. Fluoroscopic imaging is used to obtain inlet and outlet views to ensure proper trajectory for the guidewire. Optionally, a line may be drawn parallel to the C-arm beam on each view to detail cephalad/caudad (outlet view) or anterior/posterior (inlet view) directionality to assist in adjusting the guidewire as necessary.

A 1.6 mm Kirschner wire (K-wire) is placed in the posterior superior quadrant down to bone. Start point is confirmed using inlet and outlet views. Once a satisfactory start point is located, the wire is tapped into the bone with a mallet. A skin incision is made, then the scalpel is run along the pin to incise fascia. A drill sleeve is placed over the pin through the incision onto bone. The K-wire is exchanged for a 2.8mm guide pin which is inserted at least 3cm into the lateral ilium, aimed toward the S1 body (Figure 1). The 3cm is necessary to match the proximal straight portion of the flexible implant. When approaching the neural foramen, a lateral image may be taken to ensure the pin is caudal to the ilio-cortical density and cephalad to the S1 tunnel to avoid injury to the L5 or S1 nerve roots.

While holding the drill sleeve in place, the 2.8mm guide pin and drill are removed and a steerable guidewire and guide sleeve are inserted into the entry hole. A T-handled chuck is fastened over the guidewire and a mallet is used to tap the guidewire into the desired trajectory, using the ball tip of the guidewire to steer an intraosseous path. The trajectory is checked frequently using inlet and outlet views to confirm the anterior/posterior and cranial/caudal location of the wire. The wire is tapped in until it crosses the opposite SI joint, noting that a fair amount of resistance is met while crossing the SI joint.

Once the guidewire is in position, a depth gauge/implant selection device (ISD) is used to measure the desired length of the flexible intramedullary implant. Next, the guide sleeve is removed while maintaining the drill sleeve. A reamer is advanced over the guidewire, stopping short of the end of the guidewire to maximize purchase in bone. The reamer is removed, and a countersink is used as needed.

An exchange tube is placed over the steerable guidewire fully through the intraosseous channel (Figure 2). The guidewire is removed while making sure the exchange tube remains in place. A 1.6mm driving guidewire is inserted into the exchange tube. The exchange tube is then removed.

The CurvaFix implant is attached to the inserter and torque handle, then advanced over the driving guidewire using the torque handle. Once the implant is seated, the handle is turned until the inserter fins are parallel to the ground. The guidewire is removed, then the locking mechanism is activated. The inserter and torque handle are removed (Figure 3).

X-ray of a spine with a needle Description automatically generated
Figure 1.Steerable guidewire finding intraosseous path through S1.
X-ray of a spine with a needle Description automatically generated
Figure 2.Exchange tube placed over steerable guidewire.
X-ray of a person's pelvis Description automatically generated
Figure 3.S1 Trans-sacral trans-iliac CurvaFix, Standard S2 Transsacral trans-iliac cannulated screw with washer.

Results

Demographic Characteristics

From January 2021 to December 2023, one hundred and eleven patients underwent flexible intermedullary fixation for pelvic ring injuries at one of three institutions. The demographic description of patients is shown in Table 1. The mean (± SD) age of patients was 64.8 ± 20 years (range 21 to 101). 44 (39.6%) patients were male and 67 (60.4%) were female. By race, ninety patients treated with flexible intramedullary fixation identified as white or Caucasian (81.1%), nine (8.1%) identified as black or African American, and 12 declined to identify their race. Only one patient identified as Hispanic (0.9%).

Table 1.Baseline demographic descriptions of patients
Setting/Demographics Patients
Enrollment Site
   University of Pennsylvania
   University of Missouri
   University of Illinois (Springfield Memorial)
N (%)
39 (35.1%)
20 (18.0%)
52 (46.8%)
Mean age (range) 64.8 ± 20 years
Sex
   Male
   Female
N (%)
44 (39.6%)
67 (60.5%)
Race
   White/Caucasian
   Black/African American
   Declined to identify
Ethnicity
   Hispanic
   Non-Hispanic
   Declined to Identify
N (%)
90 (81.1%)
9 (8.1%)
12 (10.8%)

1 (0.9%)
95 (85.5%)
15 (13.5%)

Injury Mechanism, Fracture Patterns and Additional Orthopaedic and Non-Orthopaedic Injuries

Descriptions of patient injuries by mechanism and energy level of the injury, pelvic fracture pattern, and other associated injuries are detailed in Table 2. Fifty-one patients sustained pelvic ring fractures from high-energy mechanisms; of these, 30 were male (59%) and 21 were female (41%). Among the sixty patients who sustained pelvic ring fractures from a low-energy mechanism, 46 (77%) were female. When comparing energy of mechanism by sex by chi-squared testing, there was a significant difference between males and females (p<0.001) with low energy mechanisms more likely to be correlated with female sex.

The most common mechanism for pelvic ring injury in the available patient data for 59 patients was ground level fall (52.5%), followed by fall from a height such as ladders and roofs (13.5%). With regards to additional orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic injuries, 10 patients (9.0%) had a femur fracture, 10 patients had rib fractures, 4 (3.6%) had retroperitoneal hematomas, 7 (6.3%) had visceral injury to the liver, spleen or bowel, and 8 (7.2%) had pulmonary injuries including hemothorax, pneumothorax, and pulmonary contusion.

Pelvic fracture patterns are described in Table 2. Lateral compression type 1 and type 2 patterns were most common (25.2% and 22.5% respectively), and vertical shear injuries were the least common (0.9%).

Table 2.Injury mechanism, associated injuries, and fracture pattern.
Injury Characteristics Patients
Mechanism
   High energy
      Female
      Male
   Low energy
      Female
      Male
N (%)
51 (45.9%)
21 (18.9%)
30 (27%)
60 (54.1%)
46 (41.4%)
14 (12.6%)
Mechanism
   Ground-level fall/Insufficiency
   Fall from greater height (ladder/tree)
   Fall from bicycle
   Motor vehicle collision
   Motorcycle collision
   Gunshot wound
   Pedestrian struck
   Crushed under heavy object
   Thrown from a horse
N (% of 59)
31 (52.5%)
8 (13.5%)
2 (3.4%)
5 (8.5%)
2 (3.4%)
1 (1.7%)
4 (6.8%)
4 (6.8%)
2 (3.4%)
Additional Injuries (Non-Pelvic)
   Femur fracture
   Rib fracture
   Retroperitoneal hematoma
   Visceral injury (liver/splenic/bowel lac)
   Lung injury (hemothorax/pneumothorax)
47 (42.3%)
10 (9.0%)
10 (9.0%)
4 (3.6%)
7 (6.3%)
8 (7.2%)
Fracture Categories
   Lateral Compression (LC)
      1
      2
      3
   Anterior-Posterior Compression (APC)
   One column
   Both columns
   Unilateral sacral fracture
   Bilateral sacral fracture
   U or H-type
   Vertical shear
   Other/Combined patterns
N (% of 111)

28 (25.2%)
25 (22.5%)
4 (3.6)
6 (5.4%)
5 (4.5%)
9 (8.1%)
4 (3.6%)
11 (9.9%)
9 (8.1%)
1 (0.9%)
9 (8.1%)

Perioperative and Postoperative Outcomes

Perioperative variables including operative time and estimated blood loss, and postoperative variables such as weight bearing allowance, deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis, length of stay, post-hospitalization discharge destination, and postoperative complications are outlined in Table 3.

The mean operative time for all cases was 101.5 minutes, but after excluding cases where part of the procedure required open dissection and reduction (including only cases with purely percutaneous fixation), the mean operative time was 89 minutes (range 22-309 minutes). The average EBL for all cases was 151 cc’s, and 122 cc’s when excluding cases requiring open dissection.

Postoperatively, ninety (81.1%) patients were made weightbearing as tolerated (WBAT), 2 (1.8%) were weight protected weight bearing with a walker, 8 (7.2%) were made toe-touch weightbearing on the operative side, and 8 (7.2%) remained non-weightbearing due to other lower extremity injuries.

Table 3.Perioperative and postoperative outcomes and complications.
Perioperative/Postoperative Variables
Mean Operative Time for All Cases (n=111)
Mean Operative Time Excluding Cases that included ORIF (n=103)
101.5 ± 80 min (22-403)
89.28 ± 62 (22-309)
Estimated Blood Loss for All Cases (n=111)
Estimated Blood Loss Excluding Cases that included ORIF (n=103)
151 ± 162 cc
122 ± 110 cc
Weightbearing Status (/ indicates different WB for each lower extremity)
   Non-weight bearing (secondary to other injuries)
   Fully weightbearing as tolerated (WBAT)
   Protected WB with walker
   NWB / Toe-Touch Weightbearing
   NWB / Heel Weight Bearing (forefoot fracture)
   WBAT/ TTWB
   WBAT / NWB
N (%)
5 (4.5%)
90 (81.1%)
2 (1.8%)
2 (1.8%)
1 (0.9%)
8 (7.2%)
3 (2.7%)
Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT) Prophylaxis
   Aspirin (ASA)
   Apixaban/Rivaroxaban (DOACs)
   Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)
   Subcutaneous heparin (SQH)
   Heparin drip
   Mechanical Sequential Compression Device (SCDs)
N (%)
12 (10.8%)
11 (9.9%)
79 (71.2%)
6 (5.4%)
1 (0.9%)
1 (0.9%)
Mean Length of Stay 11.14 days ± 9.94
Range 0-68 days
Discharge Destination
   Home
   Skilled nursing facility/Extended Care facility
   Inpatient Rehabilitation/Acute rehab
   Deceased
N (%)
38 (34.2%)
55 (49.5%)
17 (15.3%)
1 (0.9%)

WBAT – weightbearing as tolerated, NWB – non-weightbearing, TTWB – toe touch weightbearing.

Most patients (71.2%) received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) postoperatively for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis. 12 patients (10.8%) received aspirin, 11 (9.9%) received a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), and 6 (5.4%) received subcutaneous heparin. Patients at high risk for bleeding were placed on a continuous heparin drip or mechanical sequential compressive device with no chemical anticoagulation.

The mean length of stay was 11.14 days ± 9.94 days and the range of length of stay was between 0 days (discharged same day) to 68 days. Half of the patients (49.5%) were discharged to a skilled nursing facility or extended care facility after hospitalization. Thirty-eight (34.2%) patients were discharged home after inpatient physical therapy assessment. 17 (15.3%) were evaluated by a physiatrist and deemed appropriate candidates for inpatient acute rehabilitation facilities. One patient expired during hospitalization.

Complications

Nine patients (8.1%) had documented complications intraoperatively and postoperatively related to pelvic fixation with a flexible intraosseous fixation, and five patients (4.5%) had medical complications during their hospitalization, detailed in Table 4.

Intraoperative complications included two cases of mal-positioned implants, one of which returned to the OR for revision. There was one case of bladder rupture which required urology consultation and repair intraoperatively. Lastly, there was one case of implant failure where the implant broke during placement into the pelvis, with inadvertent fracture of the iliac bone while retrieving the broken fragment. Postoperative complications included one case of sacral nonunion requiring revision, two nerve palsies, one wound dehiscence with superficial surgical site infection, and two cases of osteomyelitis.

Table 4.Intraoperative and postoperative complications
Intraoperative complications
1. Malpositioned implant – nail breached inside pelvis
2. Malpositioned implant – suboptimal trajectory of trans-iliac-trans-sacral nail
3. Bladder rupture requiring repair
4. Broken nail intraoperatively
Postoperative complications related to surgery
1. Sacral nonunion requiring revision surgery
2. Femoral nerve palsy / iliac bone osteomyelitis
3. Wound dehiscence / surgical site infection
4. Pubic bone osteomyelitis
5. Sciatic palsy/neuropathy
Postoperative medical complications
1. Transferred to ICU for new postoperative hypotension requiring pressors
2. GI bleed requiring EGD
3. Ileus, acute pulmonary embolism
4. Ileus requiring prolonged nasogastric tube and parenteral nutrition
5. Death from upper airway obstruction

Five patients had documented postoperative medical complications, which included need for pressors for postoperative hypotension, GI bleed, two cases of ileus, pulmonary embolism, and death from upper airway obstruction.

Follow-up Weightbearing Status

Follow-up data ranged from 10 to 123 weeks (3 to 28 months) postoperatively. The patient’s functional weightbearing ability at the most recent follow up was recorded (Table 5). Nine patients (8.1%) did not have any outpatient follow-up data available.

Excluding patients without follow-up, fifty-one (50%) patients were independent ambulators without assistive devices at their last outpatient follow-up appointment. Eleven patients (10.8%) were using a cane, and 29 (28.4%) were weight-bearing with a walker or rollator. Eight patients remained non-ambulatory or wheelchair bound, one due to unilateral lower extremity amputation, and another due to baseline dementia.

Table 5.Patient weightbearing capability at most recent follow-up.
Functional Weightbearing Status at Most Recent Follow-up N (%)
Non-ambulatory / Wheelchair
Non-weightbearing on operative side
Weightbearing as tolerated with walker or rollator
Weightbearing as tolerated with crutches
Weightbearing as tolerated with cane
Independent Ambulator (No assistive devices)
8 (7.8%)
1 (0.1%)
29 (28.4%)
2 (1.9%)
11 (10.8%)
51 (50.0%)

Discussion

This multicenter case series describes the early experience on 111 patients who underwent a novel flexible intraosseous fixation technique for pelvic ring injuries. This is the largest cases series reported to date that follows patients who received flexible fixation. While there have been several case reports of successful surgeries using this new implant (H. S. Miller and Gardner 2022), there is a dearth of information regarding postoperative complications and early functional outcomes.

All patients that were treated consecutively with this implant between January of 2021 and December of 2023 at three level 1 trauma centers were included, and early perioperative and postoperative outcomes were reported. Overall, there were few complications related to the surgery and excellent return to function postoperatively at the latest follow-up visit. Specifically, there was a 3.6% rate of intraoperative complications (4 patients) and 4.5% rate of postoperative complications (5 patients) related to the surgical procedure in our series, totaling less than 10% chance of any complications related to flexible intraosseous nailing. A third (34.2%) of the patients treated were discharged home in good condition after their hospitalization. One-half (50.0%) of the patients who followed postoperatively were able to return to weightbearing without assistive devices during their early postoperative follow up period.

Previous studies have shown that early weightbearing after pelvic ring fixation is safe, with no difference in complications such as implant failure, malunion, or loss of reduction compared to delayed weightbearing protocols (Marchand, Working, Rane, et al. 2019). Percutaneous fixation has the added benefit of reduced pain and narcotic use compared to open fixation (Benhenneda et al. 2022). In our series, 81% of patients were made fully weightbearing as tolerated immediately postoperatively, with no reported failure of hardware or fixation. The majority of patients who were limited from full weightbearing postoperatively despite stable pelvic fixation had additional lower extremity injuries which may have restricted weightbearing. Early physical therapy and rehabilitation after pelvic fixation may prevent additional complications such as venous thrombosis, skin ulcers, muscle atrophy and deconditioning, similar to geriatric hip fractures (Zuckerman 1996; Wendt, Heim, Josten, et al. 2016).

The most common pelvic ring injuries requiring fixation in this study were lateral compression 1 (LC1) injuries. There is currently no clear consensus on the management of LC1 injuries, however up to 37% of LC1 injuries have been shown to be unstable with an exam under anesthesia, which highlights the role of surgical fixation, which may improve time to mobilization, reduce complications associated with prolonged immobility, and improve long-term functional outcomes (Sagi, Coniglione, and Stanford 2011; Varma, Foxall-Smith, Donovan, et al. 2022). Surgeons have used inability to mobilize due to pain as an indication for surgical intervention (Rommens, Boudissa, Krämer, et al. 2021). A multi-center study by Tornetta et al. demonstrated higher pain scores in patients treated nonoperatively for lateral compression injuries at 3 months, although the difference between the nonoperatively and operatively treated groups was small (Tornetta, Lowe, Agel, et al. 2019).

Complications related to surgery in our study included two cases of mal-positioned implants and one bladder rupture. The latter is a rare complication related to pelvic surgery that has previously been reported in literature (Stenquist, Chavez, and Weaver 2019). Appropriate fluoroscopic visualization is necessary for any procedures requiring percutaneous fixation strategies and may be affected by patient factors such as bowel gas, osteoporosis, or excessive body mass index. Traditional percutaneous screw fixation may be especially difficult, if not impossible, in certain patients with sacral dysmorphism where standard approaches are not feasible. In conventional sacroiliac screw fixation, the incidence of screw malposition is 3-25% and the rate of neurologic damage is as high as 18% (Zarei et al. 2022). Only 2 of 111 (1.8%) patients had mal-positioned implants in our series, and 2 patients had documented nerve palsies following surgery. The flexible nature of the implant allows for curvilinear passage through a dysmorphic sacrum, which may account for the lower rate of implant malposition in our series. There was one report of a broken implant in our series, resulting in additional surgical time for implant retrieval and iatrogenic fracture of the iliac wing in the patient. Despite this being a new procedure with a learning curve for the surgeon, the complication rate in our study is lower than traditional percutaneous screw fixation.

Our study has several limitations. First, the study describes early outcomes for a series of patients who underwent a relatively novel technique of pelvic fixation, and therefore follow-up periods were limited to less than 3 years. Future follow-up is necessary to assess long-term outcomes after pelvic fixation. Additional limitations exist due to the retrospective nature of the study - the three institutions participating in this study did not have a standardized follow up protocol, limiting our ability to compare patients’ functional capacities at specific time periods postoperatively. Specific patient reported outcome measures were not available for analysis. Baseline ambulatory status was unknown for several of the patients included in the study, which may bias outcomes to poorer results in ambulatory status if not accounting for patients who were minimally ambulatory at baseline. The complications discussed here were taken from documented physician and nursing notes in patient record; however, reporting bias may be present if certain complications were not specifically documented. In particular, bladder injury and femoral or sciatic nerve palsies may have been related to the initial injury or perioperative traction, and it is unclear whether these complications were directly related to surgery. Given that we have short-to-mid-term follow up data available on this patient population, potential complications related to painful hardware requiring removal may not be apparent in this population at this time. Lastly, although this is the largest case series of patients treated with a flexible intraosseous implant currently, the information provided is purely observational, and a significantly larger number of cases is needed to make meaningful statistical analyses of outcomes after surgery. As with all novel technologies, early adopters should take significant precautions when deciding to use this implant and careful patient selection is critical.

Our case series demonstrates that flexible intraosseous fixation may be a safe, novel technique to treat various types of pelvic ring injuries, especially when helping navigate intraosseous pathways in patients with dysmorphic sacra. Our early experience at three institutions demonstrates a low complication rate comparable to known complications rates of standard percutaneous pelvic fixation. Additional future directions may look at complications rates of standard screw fixation compared to flexible fixation specifically in patients with sacral dysmorphism. Our study provides positive data to support the safe use of this novel device. Longer-term follow up data and more cases are needed to confirm our early positive outcomes with flexible intraosseous fixation of pelvic ring and acetabular injuries.

Submitted: February 25, 2025 EDT

Accepted: May 30, 2025 EDT

References

Abou-Khalil, S., S. Steinmetz, L. Mustaki, B. Leger, E. Thein, and O. Borens. 2020. “Results of Open Reduction Internal Fixation versus Percutaneous Iliosacral Screw Fixation for Unstable Pelvic Ring Injuries: Retrospective Study of 36 Patients.” Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 30 (5): 877–84. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​s00590-020-02646-x.
Google Scholar
Benhenneda, R., H. Letissier, F. Dubrana, and R. Di Francia. 2022. “Immediate Full Weight Bearing after Pelvic Percutaneous Fixation by Screw for Simple Acetabular and Pelvic Ring Fractures in Patients Older than Sixty Five Years [Published Correction Appears in Int Orthop. 2022 Oct;46(10):2423. Doi: 10.1007/S00264-022-05518-7].” Int Orthop 46 (10): 2413–21. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​s00264-022-05504-z.
Google Scholar
Bishop, J. A., and M. L. Routt Jr. 2012. “Osseous Fixation Pathways in Pelvic and Acetabular Fracture Surgery: Osteology, Radiology, and Clinical Applications.” J Trauma Acute Care Surg 72 (6): 1502–9. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​TA.0b013e318246efe5.
Google ScholarPubMed
Buller, L. T., M. J. Best, and S. M. Quinnan. 2016. “A Nationwide Analysis of Pelvic Ring Fractures: Incidence and Trends in Treatment, Length of Stay, and Mortality.” Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 7 (1): 9–17. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1177/​2151458515616250.
Google ScholarPubMed CentralPubMed
Burgess, A. R., B. J. Eastridge, J. W. Young, et al. 1990. “Pelvic Ring Disruptions: Effective Classification System and Treatment Protocols.” J Trauma 30 (7): 848–56. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​00005373-199007000-00015.
Google Scholar
Conflitti, J. M., M. L. Graves, and M. L. Chip Routt Jr. 2010. “Radiographic Quantification and Analysis of Dysmorphic Upper Sacral Osseous Anatomy and Associated Iliosacral Screw Insertions.” J Orthop Trauma 24 (10): 630–36. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0b013e3181dc50cd.
Google ScholarPubMed
Gire, Jacob D., Sam Y. Jiang, Michael J. Gardner, and Julius A. Bishop. 2018. “Percutaneous Versus Open Treatment of Posterior Pelvic Ring Injuries: Changes in Practice Patterns Over Time.” Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 32 (9): 457–60. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0000000000001236.
Google Scholar
Grotz, M. R., M. K. Allami, P. Harwood, H. C. Pape, C. Krettek, and P. V. Giannoudis. 2005. “Open Pelvic Fractures: Epidemiology, Current Concepts of Management and Outcome.” Injury 36 (1): 1–13. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.injury.2004.05.029.
Google ScholarPubMed
Hu, S., J. Guo, B. Zhu, Y. Dong, and F. Li. 2023. “Epidemiology and Burden of Pelvic Fractures: Results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.” Injury 54 (2): 589–97. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.injury.2022.12.007.
Google ScholarPubMed
Kaiser, S. P., M. J. Gardner, J. Liu, M. L. Routt Jr., and S. Morshed. 2014. “Anatomic Determinants of Sacral Dysmorphism and Implications for Safe Iliosacral Screw Placement.” J Bone Joint Surg Am 96 (14): e120. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.2106/​JBJS.M.00895.
Google ScholarPubMed
Langford, Joshua R., Andrew R. Burgess, Frank A. Liporace, and George J. Haidukewych. 2013. “Pelvic Fractures: Part 1. Evaluation, Classification, and Resuscitation.” Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 21 (8): 448–57. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.5435/​JAAOS-21-08-448.
Google Scholar
Lindsay, A., P. Tornetta III, A. Diwan, et al. 2016. “Is Closed Reduction and Percutaneous Fixation of Unstable Posterior Ring Injuries as Accurate as Open Reduction and Internal Fixation?” J Orthop Trauma 30:29–33. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0000000000000418.
Google Scholar
Marchand, L. S., Z. M. Working, A. A. Rane, et al. 2019. “Unstable Pelvic Ring Injuries: How Soon Can Patients Safely Bear Weight?” J Orthop Trauma 33 (2): 71–77. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0000000000001356.
Google Scholar
Miller, A. N., and M. L. Routt Jr. 2012. “Variations in Sacral Morphology and Implications for Iliosacral Screw Fixation.” J Am Acad Orthop Surg 20 (1): 8–16. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.5435/​JAAOS-20-01-008.
Google ScholarPubMed
Miller, H. S., and M. Gardner. 2022. “Curvafix: A Novel Implant for Pelvic Fragility Fractures.” Trauma Case Rep 43 (December):100749. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.tcr.2022.100749.
Google Scholar
Pearson, J. M., T. E. Niemeier, G. McGwin, and S. Rajaram Manoharan. 2018. “Spinopelvic Dissociation: Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous versus Open Fixation Strategies.” Adv Orthop 2018:5023908. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1155/​2018/​5023908.
Google Scholar
Pohlemann, T., H. Tscherne, F. Baumgärtel, H. J. Egbers, E. Euler, F. Maurer, M. Fell, et al. 1996. “Beckenverletzungen: Epidemiologie, Therapie und Langzeitverlauf. Ubersicht über die multizentrische Studie der Arbeitsgruppe Becken [Pelvic fractures: epidemiology, therapy and long-term outcome. Overview of the multicenter study of the Pelvis Study Group].” Unfallchirurg 99 (3): 160–67.
Google ScholarPubMed
Rommens, P. M., M. Boudissa, S. Krämer, et al. 2021. “Operative Treatment of Fragility Fractures of the Pelvis Is Connected with Lower Mortality A Single Institution Experience.” PLoS One 16:e0253408. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1371/​journal.pone.0253408.
Google Scholar
Sagi, H.C., F.M. Coniglione, and J.H. Stanford. 2011. “Examination under Anesthetic for Occult Pelvic Ring Instability.” J Orthop Trauma 25:529–36. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0b013e31822b02ae.
Google Scholar
Stenquist, D. S., T. J. Chavez, and M. J. Weaver. 2019. “Entrapment of the Urinary Bladder: A Rare Mechanism of Bladder Injury in Pelvic Trauma.” Trauma Case Reports 21:100199. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.tcr.2019.100199.
Google Scholar
Tornetta, P., J. A. Lowe, J. Agel, et al. 2019. “Does Operative Intervention Provide Early Pain Relief for Patients with Unilateral Sacral Fractures and Minimal or No Displacement?” J Orthop Trauma 33 (12): 614–18. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1097/​BOT.0000000000001578.
Google Scholar
Varma, J. R., M. Foxall-Smith, R. L. Donovan, et al. 2022. “Surgical Versus Non-Surgical Treatment of Unstable Lateral Compression Type I (LC1) Injuries of the Pelvis With Complete Sacral Fractures in Non-Fragility Fracture Patients: A Systematic Review.” Cureus 14 (9): e29239. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.7759/​cureus.29239.
Google Scholar
Wendt, K., D. Heim, C. Josten, et al. 2016. “Recommendations on Hip Fractures.” Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 42 (4): 425–31. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​s00068-016-0684-3.
Google Scholar
Wu, L. P., Y. K. Li, Y. M. Li, Y. Q. Zhang, and S. Z. Zhong. 2009. “Variable Morphology of the Sacrum in a Chinese Population.” Clin Anat 22 (5): 619–26. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1002/​ca.20809.
Google ScholarPubMed
Zakariaee, R., C. L. Schlosser, D. R. Baker, R. N. Meek, and R. J. N. Coope. 2016. “A Feasibility Study of Pelvic Morphology for Curved Implants.” Injury 47 (10): 2195–2202. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.injury.2016.07.029.
Google ScholarPubMed
Zarei, M., M. Moosavi, S. Saghebdoust, M. Shafizadeh, and M. Rostami. 2022. “Percutaneous Iliosacral Screw Insertion with Only Outlet and Inlet Fluoroscopic View for Unstable Pelvic Ring Injuries: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes.” Surg Neurol Int 13:455. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.25259/​SNI_616_2022.
Google Scholar
Zuckerman, J. D. 1996. “Hip Fracture.” N Engl J Med 334 (23): 1519–25. https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1056/​NEJM199606063342307.
Google Scholar

This website uses cookies

We use cookies to enhance your experience and support COUNTER Metrics for transparent reporting of readership statistics. Cookie data is not sold to third parties or used for marketing purposes.

Powered by Scholastica, the modern academic journal management system