Cessation of teriparatide in order to heal a humeral fracture: a case report

Denehy, Kevin; Kumar, Neil S.; Jakoi, Andre; Harding, Susan P.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2015.09.031

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From an orthopaedic surgeon's perspective, this additional effect of anabolic compounds on fracture healing seem more favourable for use in osteoanabolic therapy of osteoporosis compared with antiresorptive drugs. This tendency has been confirmed by several case series and case reports [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] despite the little evidence and a potential lack of reimbursement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Low acceptance of osteoanabolic therapy with parathyroid hormone in patients with fragility fracture of the pelvis in routine clinical practice: a retrospective observational cohort study

Suhm

Egger

Zech

et al. 2019

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction A recent randomized controlled trial has reported full patient compliance and no adverse events from therapy with parathyroid hormone (PTH) for osteoporosis and accelerated healing of fragility fractures of the pelvis. The purpose of the presented study was to evaluate if similar results can be achieved with comprehensive PTH therapy in routine clinical practice. We hypothesised that patients' burden of PTH therapy is underestimated in the literature. Patients and methods Osteoanabolic PTH therapy was recommended to 79 patients suffering from an acute fragility fracture of the pelvis (FFP). Case finding, initiation of therapy and follow-up were performed by a fracture liaison service team. Primary outcome was PTH initiation rate. Secondary outcomes were implementation rate of alternative antiresorptive pharmaceutical therapy for osteoporosis and participation rate in a bone metabolic workup. Adverse events and effects potentially related to the therapy with bone-active drugs were documented as exploratory outcomes. Results Osteoanabolic PTH therapy as suggested was accepted by 32%, whereas antiresorptive therapy was implemented in another 14% of the patients. DEXA scans were available in 38% of the patients (+ 27% when compared to baseline). A bone-specific laboratory analysis was done in 18 patients, uncovering 7 pathological findings. Two patients terminated PTH therapy early because of side effects. Conclusion The experiences with PTH therapy in FFP patients with respect to, implementation rate, frequency of side effects and of pathological findings in laboratory controls as reported from a previous RCT could not be reproduced in routine clinical practice.

show abstract