Literature DB >> 12637440

Computed tomographic assessment of fractures of the posterior wall of the acetabulum after operative treatment.

Berton R Moed1, Seann E Willson Carr, Konrad I Gruson, J Tracy Watson, Joseph G Craig.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results after operative treatment of fractures of the posterior wall of the acetabulum in relationship to the quality of the fracture reduction as assessed by postoperative two-dimensional computed tomography.
METHODS: The functional results for sixty-seven patients who had open reduction and internal fixation of an unstable fracture of the posterior wall of the acetabulum and the findings of two-dimensional computed tomography performed postoperatively were analyzed. Sixty-one patients were followed for a mean of four years after the injury, and the remaining six patients who had poor early results necessitating reconstructive surgery were followed for less than two years. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively with use of three standard plain radiographs (one anteroposterior and two Judet 45 degrees oblique pelvic radiographs) and a two-dimensional computed tomography scan. The functional outcome for the patients was evaluated with use of a modification of the clinical grading system described by Letournel and Judet. The radiographs were graded according to the criteria described by Matta. The two-dimensional computed tomography scans were used to determine fracture gap and offset measurements.
RESULTS: The clinical outcome was graded as excellent in thirty-one patients (46%), very good in twenty (30%), good in eight (12%), and poor in eight (12%). The final radiographic results were graded as excellent in fifty-three hips (79%), good in four (6%), fair in three (5%), and poor in seven (10%). There was a strong association between clinical outcome and final radiographic grade. Fracture reductions were graded as anatomic in sixty-five and imperfect in two, as determined with use of plain radiography. However, postoperative computed tomography revealed an incongruency (offset) of >2 mm in eleven hips and fracture gaps of > or = 2 mm in fifty-two. Fracture gaps of > or = 10 mm in any dimension or a total gap area of > or = 35 mm(2) were associated with a poor result. The main risk factors for a poor result were a residual fracture gap width of > or = 10 mm and osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
CONCLUSIONS: The degree of residual fracture displacement is detected more accurately on postoperative computed tomography scans than on plain radiographs. The accuracy of surgical reduction as assessed on postoperative computed tomography is highly predictive of the clinical outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III-2 (retrospective cohort study). See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12637440     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200303000-00018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  23 in total

1.  Can computed tomography predict hip stability in posterior wall acetabular fractures?

Authors:  Jeffrey M Reagan; Berton R Moed
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Pearls: How to Reduce and Fix Comminuted Posterior Acetabular Wall Fractures.

Authors:  Berton R Moed
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Can MRI accurately detect pilon articular malreduction? A quantitative comparison between CT and 3T MRI bone models.

Authors:  Shairah Radzi; Constantin Edmond Dlaska; Gary Cowin; Mark Robinson; Jit Pratap; Michael Andreas Schuetz; Sanjay Mishra; Beat Schmutz
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2016-12

4.  A biomechanical comparison of different fixation techniques for fractures of the acetabular posterior wall.

Authors:  Xinbao Wu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Surgical dislocation technique for the treatment of acetabular fractures.

Authors:  Alessandro Masse; Alessandro Aprato; Luca Rollero; Andrea Bersano; Reinhold Ganz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  Pathogenesis and prevention of posttraumatic osteoarthritis after intra-articular fracture.

Authors:  Mara L Schenker; Robert L Mauck; Jaimo Ahn; Samir Mehta
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.020

7.  Neglected acetabular fracture: Fix or replace?

Authors:  Ismail Hadisoebroto Dilogo; Jephtah Furano Lumban Tobing
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-06-02

8.  Assessment of two 3-D fluoroscopic systems for articular fracture reduction: a cadaver study.

Authors:  Yoram A Weil; Meir Liebergall; Rami Mosheiff; Syndie B Singer; Leo Joskowicz; Amal Khoury
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2011-02-06       Impact factor: 2.924

9.  [Posterior approaches to the acetabulum].

Authors:  K-A Siebenrock; M Tannast; J D Bastian; M J B Keel
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.000

10.  A surgical approach algorithm for transverse posterior wall fractures aids in reduction quality.

Authors:  Yelena Bogdan; Shashank Dwivedi; Paul Tornetta
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.