Andy Tsai1, Patrick R Johnston2, Jeannette M Perez-Rossello2, Micheál A Breen2, Paul K Kleinman2. 1. Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Ave., Boston, MA, 02115, USA. andy.tsai@childrens.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Ave., Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The distal tibia is a common location for the classic metaphyseal lesion (CML). Prior radiologic-pathologic studies have suggested a tendency for medial, as opposed to lateral, cortical injury with the CML, but there has been no formal study of the geographic distribution of this strong indicator of abuse. OBJECTIVE: This study compares medial versus lateral cortical involvement of distal tibial CMLs in a clinical cohort of infants with suspected abuse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Reports of 1,020 skeletal surveys performed for suspected abuse (July 2005-June 2016) were reviewed. Twenty-six distal tibial CMLs (14 unilateral, 6 bilateral) with anteroposterior (AP) and lateral projections on the initial skeletal survey and at least an AP view on the follow-up survey were identified in 20 infants. Two blinded pediatric radiologists determined if the medial and/or lateral margins of the distal tibial metaphysis were involved by the CML. RESULTS: Average interreader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.69-0.90 and 0.45-0.72, respectively. Average intrareader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.65-0.88 and 0.44-0.57, respectively. Analyses showed that the distal tibial CML almost always involved the medial cortical margin (reader 1=89%, reader 2=88%, pooled=89%) and the fracture infrequently involved the lateral cortical margin (reader 1=12%, reader 2=38%, pooled=26%). The percentage point difference between fracture involvement in medial and lateral margins was statistically significant from zero (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The distal tibial CML is most often encountered medially; lateral involvement is uncommon. This observation should help guide the radiologic diagnosis and could have implications for understanding the biomechanics of this distinctive injury.
BACKGROUND: The distal tibia is a common location for the classic metaphyseal lesion (CML). Prior radiologic-pathologic studies have suggested a tendency for medial, as opposed to lateral, cortical injury with the CML, but there has been no formal study of the geographic distribution of this strong indicator of abuse. OBJECTIVE: This study compares medial versus lateral cortical involvement of distal tibial CMLs in a clinical cohort of infants with suspected abuse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Reports of 1,020 skeletal surveys performed for suspected abuse (July 2005-June 2016) were reviewed. Twenty-six distal tibial CMLs (14 unilateral, 6 bilateral) with anteroposterior (AP) and lateral projections on the initial skeletal survey and at least an AP view on the follow-up survey were identified in 20 infants. Two blinded pediatric radiologists determined if the medial and/or lateral margins of the distal tibial metaphysis were involved by the CML. RESULTS: Average interreader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.69-0.90 and 0.45-0.72, respectively. Average intrareader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.65-0.88 and 0.44-0.57, respectively. Analyses showed that the distal tibial CML almost always involved the medial cortical margin (reader 1=89%, reader 2=88%, pooled=89%) and the fracture infrequently involved the lateral cortical margin (reader 1=12%, reader 2=38%, pooled=26%). The percentage point difference between fracture involvement in medial and lateral margins was statistically significant from zero (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The distal tibial CML is most often encountered medially; lateral involvement is uncommon. This observation should help guide the radiologic diagnosis and could have implications for understanding the biomechanics of this distinctive injury.
Authors: Paul K Kleinman; Jeannette M Perez-Rossello; Alice W Newton; Henry A Feldman; Patricia L Kleinman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Boaz Karmazyn; Ryan D Duhn; S Gregory Jennings; Matthew R Wanner; Bilal Tahir; Roberta Hibbard; Ralph Hicks Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2011-10-06
Authors: Patricia L Kleinman; David Zurakowski; Keith J Strauss; Robert H Cleveland; Jeannette M Perez-Rosello; David P Nichols; Kelly H Zou; Paul K Kleinman Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Emalee G Flaherty; Jeannette M Perez-Rossello; Michael A Levine; William L Hennrikus Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Sabah Servaes; Stephen D Brown; Arabinda K Choudhary; Cindy W Christian; Stephen L Done; Laura L Hayes; Michael A Levine; Joëlle A Moreno; Vincent J Palusci; Richard M Shore; Thomas L Slovis Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2016-02-17