| Literature DB >> 27567608 |
Pengbo Chen1, Hao Shen1, Wei Wang1, Binbin Ni1, Zhiyuan Fan1, Hua Lu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tibial plateau fractures are of great challenge to treat with open reduction and internal fixation, because fractures vary from simple to complex, with little or extensive articular involvement. Hence, recognition and comprehension of the fracture features will help orthopedic surgeons understand the injury mechanism better and manage these fractures by planning optimal surgical procedures. This study aimed to evaluate the morphological characteristics of tibial plateau fractures based on the Schatzker classification.Entities:
Keywords: Computed tomography; Morphological feature; Schatzker type; Tibial plateau fracture
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27567608 PMCID: PMC5002333 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-016-0427-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Fig. 1The method to calculate the fracture line angle (FLA) and depict the depression. a The FLA is determined by measuring the included angle between BF and major fracture line MN. B is the middle point of the posterior cruciate ligament’s insertion on the tibial plateau; F is the medial 1/3 point of the tibial tuberosity. BF is used as the reference line to determine the major FLA. b The depression zone is depicted with a certain gray value and transparency level. The red points at the border are the position with ≥2 mm depression, but not all the borders are of less than 2 mm of depression
Fig. 2The method to calculate the depression depth. a X is the most depressed point of the articular surface. b PL is the normal articular surface plane. c Anteroposterior. d Lateral. The depression depth is obtained by calculating the distance from X to PL
Demographic and clinical data of patients with tibial plateau fractures
| Parameter | Patients |
|---|---|
| Mean age (range), years | 54.9 (17–87) |
| Gender (male/female), | 106/80 |
| Causes of fracture, | |
| Road traffic accidents | 79 (42.5 %) |
| Falling from a height | 45 (24.2 %) |
| Riding electromobile injuries | 38 (20.4 %) |
| Others | 24 (12.9 %) |
| Affected side, | |
| Left | 112 (60.2 %) |
| Right | 72 (38.7 %) |
| Bilateral | 2 (1.1 %) |
| Simple fracture, | 130 (69.9 %) |
| Complicated fracture, | 56 (30.1 %) |
| Schatzker classification ( | |
| Type I | 12 |
| Type II | 74 |
| Type III | 29 |
| Type IV | 15 |
| Type V | 30 |
| Type VI | 28 |
| Associated injury, | |
| Other fracture within the knee joint | 45 |
| Non-knee joint fracture | 38 |
| Organic lesion | 32 |
| Craniocerebral injury | 23 |
Fracture line angle (FLA) of different Schatzker types of tibial plateau fractures
| Schatzker type | FLA (°) |
|---|---|
| Type I | |
| Single anterolateral fracture (SALF) | 145.92 ± 16.06 |
| Single posterolateral fracture (SPLF) | 208.87 ± 6.85 |
| Anterolateral part of complex fracture (CF) | 149.59 ± 9.33 |
| Posterolateral part of CF | 248.80 ± 11.53 |
| Type II | |
| SALF | 149.66 ± 13.17 |
| SPLF | 235.79 ± 19.85 |
| Anterolateral part of CF | 127.41 ± 16.51 |
| Posterolateral part of CF | 231.62 ± 14.71 |
| Type IV | |
| Single posteromedial fracture (SPMF) | 293.27 ± 26.76 |
| Single anteromedial fracture (SAMF) | 409.66 ± 17.24 |
| Whole medial fracture (WMF) | 341.10 ± 16.34 |
Fig. 3The “heat maps” of tibial plateau fractures with depression zone. a–c single anterolateral fracture (SALF), single posterolateral fracture (SPLF), and complex fracture (CF) of Schatzker type II. d Schatzker Type III. e–f Single anteromedial fracture (SAMF) and whole medial fracture (WMF) of Schatzker type IV. g Schatzker type V. h Schatzker type VI. The final gray value (frequency diagram) indicated the incidence of depression at the certain location
Depression depth of different Schatzker types and subtypes of tibial plateau fractures
| Schatzker type | Depression rate (%) | Depression depth, mm | Mean score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type II | 74 (100 %) | 7.85 ± 4.24 a | 73.43 |
| Single anterolateral fracture (SALF) | 48 (64.9 %) | 8.43 ± 4.26 | – |
| Single posterolateral fracture (SPLF) | 4 (5.4 %) | 5.59 ± 2.74 | – |
| Complex fracture (CF) | 22 (29.7 %) | 7.13 ± 4.35 | – |
| Type III | 29 (100 %) | 5.16 ± 1.49 b | 44.71 |
| Type IV | 9 (60.00 %) | 16.7 ± 8.84 a | 120.44 |
| Single posteromedial fracture (SPMF) | 0 | – | – |
| Single anteromedial fracture (SAMF) | 3 (33.3 %) | 8.15 ± 3.40 | – |
| Whole medial fracture (WMF) | 6 (66.7 %) | 17.93 ± 10.05 | – |
| Type V | 26 (86.67 %) | 11.99 ± 6.93 a | 101.81 |
| Type VI | 21 (75.00 %) | 13.25 ± 8.73 a | 107.57 |
Fracture types with different letters means that depression depth were significant different between different Schatzker types