| Literature DB >> 24875057 |
Abolfazl Najaf-Zadeh1, Eric Nectoux, François Dubos, Laurent Happiette, Xavier Demondion, Magloire Gnansounou, Bernard Herbaux, Alain Martinot.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24875057 PMCID: PMC4164871 DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2014.925353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Orthop ISSN: 1745-3674 Impact factor: 3.717
Figure 1.Flow diagram outlining the study selection process.
Characteristics and results of the studies included
| Study | Study type | Setting | Patients | Age | Reference standard | Fracture, n | Total | Other bone-related injury | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| significant | Insignificant | ||||||||
|
| P | ED | 10 | 10.7 | MRI within 1–4 days of injury | Distal tibia: 2 | 0 | 2 | Contusions: 8 Periosteal reaction: 2 |
|
| P | OC | 20 | 10.3 | MRI within 3 days of injury | 0 | SH1DF: 3 | ||
| Fibular avulsion: 3 | 6 | Contusions: 18 | |||||||
| Boutis et al. 2011 | P | ED | 18 | 8.7 | MRI within 1 week of injury | 0 | Fibular avulsion: 1 | 1 | Contusions: 11 |
|
| P | ED | 10 | 11.6 | MRI within 3 days of injury | Medial malleolus: 1 | |||
| Navicular:1 | 0 | 2 | Ns | ||||||
|
| P | ED | 10 | ≥6 | MRI within 7 days of injury | Lower tibia and fibula growth plate injury: 2 Lower tibia growth plate injury: 2 | Lower fibula growth plate injury: 1 | ||
| 5 | Periosteal reaction: 7 | ||||||||
|
| P | ED | 41 | 8 | 2- to 3-week follow-up radiographs | 0 | Small metaphyseal cortical fractures of the distal fibula: 11 | 11 | – |
| Simanovsky et al. | P | ED | 20 | 10.5 | 2- to 3-week follow-up radiographs | 0 | Small metaphyseal cortical fractures of the distal fibula: 6 | 6 | – |
|
| R | ED | 21 | 1–18 | Follow-up radiographs | 4 | 0 | 4 | – |
|
| R | ED | 37 | 8.5 | 3-week follow-up radiographs | Distal fibula and tibia: 1 | Distal fibula: 6 | 7 | – |
P: prospective; R: retrospective
ED: emergency department; OC: outpatient clinic
MRI: magnetic resonance imaging;
SH1DF: Salter-Harris type-1 distal fibula;
Ns: not specified.
The authors included children with radiography-negative acute joint injury in their study; of those, only children with ankle injury were included in our review.
Mean.
The number represents the mean age of the patients (n = 24) with acute joint injuries included in the study.
The authors included children with radiography-negative acute ankle injury in their study; of those, only children with clinical suspicion of fracture were included in our review.
The number represents the mean age of the patients (n = 102) with radiography-negative acute ankle injuries included in the study.
The authors also assessed the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound (performed within 24 h of admission) in comparison to 2- to 3-week follow-up radiographs as reference standard.
Range.
All were considered significant because they were associated with an increased risk of complications if under-treated.
One child had 2 isolated injuries, one in each ankle 4 months apart.
Operating characteristics of ultrasound for diagnosis of occult fractures in children with radiography-negative ankle injury and clinical suspicion of fracture
| Study | Patients n | Prevalence % | Sensitivity and (95% CI) | Specificity and (95% CI) | Positive LR and (95% CI) | Negative LR and (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 41 | 27 | 1.00 (0.72–1.00) | 0.97 (0.83–1.00) | 20 (4–95) | 0.04 (0.00–0.66) |
|
| 20 | 30 | 1.00 (0.54–1.00) | 0.93 (0.66–1.00) | 9 (2–43) | 0.08 (0.01–1.15) |
LR: likelihood ratio; CI: confidence interval.
Figure 2.Forest plot displaying the pooled prevalence of occult fractures in children with radiography-negative acute ankle injury and clinical suspicion of fracture.