Search

Aims: To investigate if preoperative CT improves detection of unstable trochanteric hip fractures. Methods: A single-centre prospective study was conducted. Patients aged 65 years or older with trochanteric hip fractures admitted to Stavanger University Hospital (Stavanger, Norway) were consecutively included from September 2020 to January 2022. Radiographs and CT images of the fractures were obtained, and surgeons made individual assessments of the fractures based on these. The assessment was conducted according to a systematic protocol including three classification systems (AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), Evans Jensen (EVJ), and Nakano) and questions addressing specific fracture patterns. An expert group provided a gold-standard assessment based on the CT images. Sensitivities and specificities of surgeons’ assessments were estimated and compared in regression models with correlations for the same patients. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were presented as Cohen’s kappa and Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1). Results: We included 120 fractures in 119 patients. Compared to radiographs, CT increased the sensitivity of detecting unstable trochanteric fractures from 63% to 70% (p = 0.028) and from 70% to 76% (p = 0.004) using AO/OTA and EVJ, respectively. Compared to radiographs alone, CT increased the sensitivity of detecting a large posterolateral trochanter major fragment or a comminuted trochanter major fragment from 63% to 76% (p = 0.002) and from 38% to 55% (p < 0.001), respectively. CT improved intra-rater reliability for stability assessment using EVJ (AC1 0.68 to 0.78; p = 0.049) and for detecting a large posterolateral trochanter major fragment (AC1 0.42 to 0.57; p = 0.031). Conclusion: A preoperative CT of trochanteric fractures increased detection of unstable fractures using the AO/OTA and EVJ classification systems. Compared to radiographs, CT improved intra-rater reliability when assessing fracture stability and detecting large posterolateral trochanter major fragments. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):524–531.

Introduction: The study was conducted to evaluate clinical and functional outcomes of comminuted pilon of distal tibial fractures after surgical management and fixation by modalities available ranging from temporary external fixation, simple distal tibial plates to moderate plating system and intra medullary nails for fibula. Methodology: Total 24 cases with intraarticular distal tibial pilon fracture were randomly divided in to two group. One group was managed by one stage procedure and second group was operated by two stage procedure. Results: From this study we infer that patient who had undergone one stage procedure had shorter hospital stay. In present study we observed that arthrosis, superficial infection and arthritis was higher in two stage procedure. Assessed by Ovadia Beals Evaluation Score - Objective Evaluation as well as subjective evaluation. Furthermore, the rate of complications was also identical. However, functional outcome assessed using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score revealed that the patients underwent one stage procedure had better functional outcome. Conclusion: Considering the better functional outcome and the shorter hospital stay, we preferred using one stage operative procedure in better skin condition, less soft tissue damage, closed fracture of type b and C AO/OTA Pilon fractures.

Introduction: The study was conducted to evaluate clinical and functional outcomes of comminuted pilon of distal tibial fractures after surgical management and fixation by modalities available ranging from temporary external fixation, simple distal tibial plates to moderate plating system and intra medullary nails for fibula. Methodology: Total 24 cases with intraarticular distal tibial pilon fracture were randomly divided in to two group. One group was managed by one stage procedure and second group was operated by two stage procedure. Results: From this study we infer that patient who had undergone one stage procedure had shorter hospital stay. In present study we observed that arthrosis, superficial infection and arthritis was higher in two stage procedure. Assessed by Ovadia Beals Evaluation Score - Objective Evaluation as well as subjective evaluation. Furthermore, the rate of complications was also identical. However, functional outcome assessed using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score revealed that the patients underwent one stage procedure had better functional outcome. Conclusion: Considering the better functional outcome and the shorter hospital stay, we preferred using one stage operative procedure in better skin condition, less soft tissue damage, closed fracture of type b and C AO/OTA Pilon fractures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The classification systems for proximal humeral fractures routinely used in clinical practice include the Neer and Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 2007 systems. Currently used systems have low inter- and intraobserver reliability. In 2018, AO/OTA introduced a new classification system with the aim of simplifying the coding process, in which the Neer four-part classification was integrated into the fracture description. The aim of the present work is to assess the inter- and intraobserver agreement of the new AO/OTA 2018 compared with the Neer and AO/OTA 2007 classifications. Materials and methods A total of 116 radiographs of consecutive patients with proximal humeral fracture were selected and classified by three observers with different levels of experience. All three observers independently reviewed and classified the images according to the Neer, AO/OTA 2007, and new AO/OTA 2018 systems. To determine the intraobserver agreement, the observers reviewed the same set of radiographs after an interval of 8 weeks. The inter- and intraobserver agreement were determined through Cohen’s kappa coefficient analysis. Results The new AO/OTA 2018 classification showed substantial mean inter- (k = 0.67) and intraobserver (k = 0.75) agreement. These results are similar to the reliability observed for the Neer classification (interobserver, k = 0.67; intraobserver, k = 0.85) but better than those found for the AO/OTA 2007 system, which showed only moderate inter- (k = 0.57) and intraobserver (k = 0.58) agreement. The two more experienced observers showed better overall agreement, but no statistically significant difference was found. No differences were found between surgical experience and agreement regarding specific fracture types or groups. Conclusions The results showed that the Neer system still represents the more reliable and reproducible classification. However, the new AO/OTA 2018 classification improved the agreement among observers compared with the AO/OTA 2007 system, while still maintaining substantial descriptive power and simplifying the coding process. The universal modifiers and qualifications, despite their possible complexity, allowed a more comprehensive fracture definition without negatively affecting the reliability or reproducibility of the classification system. Level of evidence: Level III, diagnostic studies

Background: The addition of 3D CT scans for observers evaluating tibial plateau fractures decreases agreement and diagnostic accuracy, possibly due to obstruction of the view by unfractured bones (i.e., patella, fibula, and femur) in 3D reconstructions.Questions/purposes: This study compared (1) the interobserver agreement between (subgroups of) observers classifying 3DCT reconstructions of tibial plateau fractures according to Schatzker, Luo, and AO/OTA, (2) recognition of different fracture characteristics, and (3) the level of confidence on a scale from 0 to 10 with and without subtraction of the unfractured bones.Methods: We selected twenty consecutive 3DCT reconstructions of tibial plateau fractures treated in a level I trauma center between 2013 and 2014. Members of the Science of Variation Group were randomized (1:1) to evaluate reconstructions with or without subtraction of the unfractured bone. Forty-nine surgeons completed the survey. The interobserver agreement was determined using Fleiss' kappa, and bootstrapping (resamples = 1000) was used to calculate the standard error, z statistic, and confidence intervals.Results: Overall, subtraction of unfractured bones did not affect interobserver agreement in Schatzker, Luo, and AO/OTA classification systems, agreement on the presence of fracture characteristics, and level of confidence. In subgroup analysis, non-trauma surgeons had significantly higher agreement in the three classification systems with subtraction. For fracture characteristics, some subgroups had higher agreement while others had lower agreement with subtraction.Discussion: The finding that agreement on classification of tibial plateau fractures is limited on 3DCT scan and is not improved by subtraction of unfractured bones suggests that disagreement may be based on variations in understanding and bias. Reliability of these classification systems might benefit from a focus on accounting for these pre-existing conceptualizations rather than further emphasis on imaging detail.Level Of Evidence: Diagnostic, level 1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The classification systems for proximal humeral fractures routinely used in clinical practice include the Neer and Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 2007 systems. Currently used systems have low inter- and intraobserver reliability. In 2018, AO/OTA introduced a new classification system with the aim of simplifying the coding process, in which the Neer four-part classification was integrated into the fracture description. The aim of the present work is to assess the inter- and intraobserver agreement of the new AO/OTA 2018 compared with the Neer and AO/OTA 2007 classifications.Materials and Methods: A total of 116 radiographs of consecutive patients with proximal humeral fracture were selected and classified by three observers with different levels of experience. All three observers independently reviewed and classified the images according to the Neer, AO/OTA 2007, and new AO/OTA 2018 systems. To determine the intraobserver agreement, the observers reviewed the same set of radiographs after an interval of 8 weeks. The inter- and intraobserver agreement were determined through Cohen's kappa coefficient analysis.Results: The new AO/OTA 2018 classification showed substantial mean inter- (k = 0.67) and intraobserver (k = 0.75) agreement. These results are similar to the reliability observed for the Neer classification (interobserver, k = 0.67; intraobserver, k = 0.85) but better than those found for the AO/OTA 2007 system, which showed only moderate inter- (k = 0.57) and intraobserver (k = 0.58) agreement. The two more experienced observers showed better overall agreement, but no statistically significant difference was found. No differences were found between surgical experience and agreement regarding specific fracture types or groups.Conclusions: The results showed that the Neer system still represents the more reliable and reproducible classification. However, the new AO/OTA 2018 classification improved the agreement among observers compared with the AO/OTA 2007 system, while still maintaining substantial descriptive power and simplifying the coding process. The universal modifiers and qualifications, despite their possible complexity, allowed a more comprehensive fracture definition without negatively affecting the reliability or reproducibility of the classification system.Level Of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is devoted to the new classification of fractures according to the principles of AO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Fur Osteosynthesefragen) and ОТА (Orthopedic Trauma Association). Presented short historical information about creation and spreading of classification of the long bones fractures. It is explained what was the authorʼs aim of the last compendium and why changes had happened. It was described the reasons why shaft fractures of type B1 and C1 were deleted from the classification, changes in the proximal shoulder and femoral fractures distribution. There was new approach to the classification of the two bone segments. Nowadays fractures of the forearm are divided separately, but ulnar and radial bones fractures are classified according to standard approach. It was shown the characteristics as for Monteggia та Galeazzi fractures. Similar is approach to crus fractures. There were new parts in the classification with universal modifications and characteristics. Authors gave examples how these new innovations can help to characterize bone muscles system more precisely. Classification of joints luxation with or without fractures was presented. It was presented to which l ocalization we should concern isolated internal malleus or posterior tibia edge with intact (43В) or broken fibula (44). The new remarks as for fractures writing are described (absence of hyphen, appearance of the new signs in round and square brackets. The new approach as for sections with combined bone segments like broken wrist and foot. Names of classifications were included into compendium-2018, like periprosthetic fractures, injuries of spine, breast, ribs, scapula, pelvic ring and sacrum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Traditionally, distal radius fractures (DRFs) have been described using eponyms, e.g. Colles, Smith, Barton, Chauffeur. During the last half of the 20th century several classification systems for DRF have emerged. We evaluated the inter- and intra-observer agreement of the AO/OTA, Frykman and Older classification systems.Methods: Four observers, an intern, an orthopaedic registrar, an orthopaedic consultant and a radiology consultant, independently evaluated DRF radiograms and classified the fractures according to the AO/OTA, Frykman and Older classification systems. After an interval of 6 months, radiograms of 30 randomly chosen patients were re-evaluated by the same observers.Results: Radiograms of 573 DRF patients were evaluated in the study. The inter-observer reliability of the AO/OTA fracture types (A, B and C) was 'weak' (kappa = 0.45). The agreement dropped to 'minimal' (kappa = 0.24) regarding the AO/OTA groups (A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2 and C3). The reliability of the Frykman classification system was 'weak' (kappa = 0.41), and we observed the lowest inter-observer reliability for the Older classification system (kappa = 0.10). The kappa values for the intra-observer reproducibility of the AO/OTA fracture types (A, B and C) ranged from 0.58 to 0.87. For the AO/OTA groups (A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2 and C3) the reproducibility was lower ranging from 'minimal' to 'weak'. The intra-observer reproducibility of the Frykman system was 'weak' to 'moderate' and even worse for the Older classification system.Conclusion: Based on these findings the AO/OTA classification system seems to be most reliable for routine use, however, with lower kappa values concerning the agreement for the groups. The Frykman and Older classification systems cannot be recommended because of less convincing results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]