| Literature DB >> 34457222 |
Yuanyuan Shi1, Si Chen2, Xue Chen3, Pan Xue3.
Abstract
Aim: To study the diagnostic effect of hip fracture in the elderly. In this paper, a total of 100 elderly patients with hip fracture from January 2020 to May 2021 were selected for X-ray and CT examination after admission. The operation was taken as the final criteria for determining hip fracture type, and the diagnosis of hip fracture by CT three-dimensional reconstruction was analyzed and studied. The results showed that the diagnostic rate of CT 3D reconstruction for various types of hip fracture in the elderly was higher than that of CT plain scan and X-ray (P < 0.05). For the diagnosis of intra-articular small bone fragments, the rate of missed diagnosis was 2% (2/100) with CT 3D reconstruction, 10% (10/100) with conventional CT scan, and 20% (20/100) with X-ray. The rate of misdiagnosis was 5.0% (5/100) with CT 3D reconstruction. Routine CT scan was 15% (15/100), X-ray was 30% (30/100), and CT 3D reconstruction was significantly lower than other examinations (P < 0.05).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34457222 PMCID: PMC8397570 DOI: 10.1155/2021/7865155
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
The diagnosis of various types of senile hip fractures by different examination methods.
| The fracture types | CT 3D reconstruction | Routine CT | X-ray |
|---|---|---|---|
| Femoral neck fracture | 100.0% (58/58) | 94.83% (55/58) | 86.21% (50/58) |
| Intertrochanteric fracture of femur | 100.0% (29/29) | 93.10% (27/29) | 75.86% (22/29) |
| Acetabulum fracture | 96.67% (29/30) | 86.67% (26/30) | 56.67% (17/30) |
Note. ① Femoral neck fracture: Comparison of 3D reconstruction and conventional CT, χ2 = 4.1039, P < 0.05; Three-dimensional reconstruction compared to X-ray, χ2 = 7.6631, P < 0.05; Conventional CT versus X-ray, χ2 = 6.0583, P < 0.05; ② Intertrochanteric fracture of femur: comparison of three-dimensional reconstruction and conventional CT, χ2 = 5.2043, P < 0.05; Three-dimensional reconstruction compared to X-ray, χ2 = 11.0926, P < 0.05; Conventional CT versus X-ray, χ2 = 9.2235, P < 0.05; ③ Acetabular fractures: Comparison of 3D reconstruction and conventional CT, χ2 = 8.4921, P < 0.05; Three-dimensional reconstruction compared to X-ray, χ2 = 16.3928, P < 0.05; Conventional CT versus X-ray, χ2 = 12.1149, P < 0.05.
Diagnosis of intraarticular small bone fragments by different examination methods.
| The fracture types | The missed diagnosis (%) | The misdiagnosis rate (%) |
|---|---|---|
| CT 3D reconstruction | 2.5 | 5.0 |
| Routine CT | 8.75 | 12.50 |
| X-ray | 18.75 | 27.50 |
Note. In terms of missed diagnosis rate, the comparison between CT 3D reconstruction and conventional CT, χ2 = 3.3649, P < 0.05; Comparison of CT 3D reconstruction and X-ray, χ2 = 8.0237, P < 0.05; Routine CT scans compared to x-rays, χ2 = 5.1282, P < 0.05; In terms of misdiagnosis rate, the comparison between CT 3D reconstruction and conventional CT, χ2 = 3.4035, P < 0.05; Comparison of CT 3D reconstruction and X-ray, χ2 = 11.2391, P < 0.05; Routine CT scans compared to x-rays, χ2 = 8.0907, P < 0.05.