Evidence Hub

Association between antiosteoporosis medications and risk of sacral fracture after lumbosacral fusion in adults with osteoporosis: A proportional hazards analysis

Baumann AN, Cuttica N, Trager RJ, Anaspure O, Sewell J, Cottrill EJ, Metcalf T, Conry KT

Journal of orthopaedics, 2026

13,625 participants

Abstract

Objective: Sacral fracture is an uncommon complication after lumbosacral fusion, with recent evidence suggesting that osteoporosis is an independent risk factor. However, data on the association between antiosteoporosis medications and sacral fracture incidence following lumbosacral fusion remains limited. This study explored associations between antiosteoporosis medication classes and sacral fracture risk after lumbosacral fusion in osteoporotic adults, to identify possible risk mitigation strategies.

Methods: This retrospective database study included osteoporotic adults who underwent first-time lumbosacral fusion between 2005 and 2023. Patients were divided into short fusion (3-6 spinal levels fused) and very short fusion (≤2 levels) cohorts to control for fusion length. The primary outcome was incidence of sacral fracture within two years postoperatively. Cumulative incidence of sacral fracture was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling (p < 0.05). Antiosteoporosis medication classes evaluated in our Cox hazard model included vitamin D, denosumab, bisphosphonates, as well as teriparatide.

Results: Among 13,625 osteoporotic patients who underwent lumbosacral fusion, 347 sacral fractures occurred within two years (2.55% incidence). There were 56 sacral fractures in the short fusion cohort and 291 sacral fractures in the very short fusion cohort. Vitamin D was associated with reduced…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 13,625 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free