Literature DB >> 21481611

Proximal humeral fracture classification systems revisited.

Addie Majed1, Iain Macleod, Anthony M J Bull, Karol Zyto, Herbert Resch, Ralph Hertel, Peter Reilly, Roger J H Emery.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: This study evaluated several classification systems and expert surgeons' anatomic understanding of these complex injuries based on a consecutive series of patients. We hypothesized that current proximal humeral fracture classification systems, regardless of imaging methods, are not sufficiently reliable to aid clinical management of these injuries.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Complex fractures in 96 consecutive patients were investigated by generation of rapid sequence prototyping models from computed tomography Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) imaging data. Four independent senior observers were asked to classify each model using 4 classification systems: Neer, AO, Codman-Hertel, and a prototype classification system by Resch. Interobserver and intraobserver κ coefficient values were calculated for the overall classification system and for selected classification items.
RESULTS: The κ coefficient values for the interobserver reliability were 0.33 for Neer, 0.11 for AO, 0.44 for Codman-Hertel, and 0.15 for Resch. Interobserver reliability κ coefficient values were 0.32 for the number of fragments and 0.30 for the anatomic segment involved using the Neer system, 0.30 for the AO type (A, B, C), and 0.53, 0.48, and 0.08 for the Resch impaction/distraction, varus/valgus and flexion/extension subgroups, respectively. Three-part fractures showed low reliability for the Neer and AO systems. DISCUSSION: Currently available evidence suggests fracture classifications in use have poor intra- and inter-observer reliability despite the modality of imaging used thus making treating these injuries difficult as weak as affecting scientific research as well. This study was undertaken to evaluate the reliability of several systems using rapid sequence prototype models.
CONCLUSION: Overall interobserver κ values represented slight to moderate agreement. The most reliable interobserver scores were found with the Codman-Hertel classification, followed by elements of Resch's trial system. The AO system had the lowest values. The higher interobserver reliability values for the Codman-Hertel system showed that is the only comprehensive fracture description studied, whereas the novel classification by Resch showed clear definition in respect to varus/valgus and impaction/distraction angulation.
Copyright © 2011 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21481611     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  28 in total

1.  Classifications in brief: the Neer classification for proximal humerus fractures.

Authors:  Bradley C Carofino; Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  CORR Insights(®): Greater Tuberosity Fractures: Does Fracture Assessment and Treatment Recommendation Vary Based on Imaging Modality?

Authors:  Donald H Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  [Proximal humerus fracture: new aspects in epidemiology, fracture morphology, and diagnostics].

Authors:  C Hirzinger; M Tauber; H Resch
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.000

4.  Fracture of the proximal humerus with disruption of the tendon of the pectoralis major.

Authors:  Bart M Berghs; Alexander Van Tongel; Thomas De Bo; Lieven F De Wilde
Journal:  Int J Shoulder Surg       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar

5.  Analysis of four-fragment fractures of the proximal humerus: the interest of 2D and 3D imagery and inter- and intra-observer reproducibility.

Authors:  X Ohl; P Mangin; C Barbe; V Brun; C Nerot; F Sirveaux
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-01-24

6.  The classification of complex 4-part humeral fractures revisited: the missing fifth fragment and indications for surgery.

Authors:  Raffaele Russo; Fabio Cautiero; Giuseppe Della Rotonda
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2012-04-19

7.  The amount of impaction and loss of reduction in osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures after surgical fixation.

Authors:  S Carbone; M Papalia
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  The amount of humeral head impaction of proximal humeral fractures fixed with the Humerusblock device.

Authors:  Stefano Carbone; Philipp Moroder; Valerio Arceri; Roberto Postacchini; Stefano Gumina
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Treatment choice affects inpatient adverse events and mortality in older aged inpatients with an isolated fracture of the proximal humerus.

Authors:  Valentin Neuhaus; Arjan G J Bot; Christiaan H J Swellengrebel; Nitin B Jain; Jon J P Warner; David C Ring
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2013-10-14       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Simulation of bone-determined range of motion in proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Addie Majed; Tanujan Thangarajah; Peter Krekel; Rob Nelissen; Peter Reilly; Anthony Bull; Roger Emery
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2017-06-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.