Cargando…
A Novel and Open Classification Emphasizing on Osteoligamentous Complex for Distal Clavicle Fractures
OBJECTIVE: Current X‐ray‐based classification methods cannot describe all distal clavicle fracture (DCF) patterns, especially the osteoligamentous injury pattern of DCFs. We aimed to develop a novel classification based on the osteoligamentous injury pattern of the DCFs and investigated its reliabil...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10432498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36523173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13633 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: Current X‐ray‐based classification methods cannot describe all distal clavicle fracture (DCF) patterns, especially the osteoligamentous injury pattern of DCFs. We aimed to develop a novel classification based on the osteoligamentous injury pattern of the DCFs and investigated its reliability. METHODS: All DCFs from January 2017 to January 2022 were respectively screened and 45 cases (mean age 20–78; male 31, female 14) met the including criteria and were enrolled. Based on their Zanca view X‐ray radiograph and three‐dimensional CT construction images, we analyzed the osteoligamentous injury pattern of each case, particularly the acromioclavicular (AC) and coracoclavicular ligaments and their bone attachment. Then we developed a novel classification method, five types in total, sorting all DCFs according to their lesion manifestations of osteoligamentous complex. Also, we investigated the inter‐ and intra‐observer reliability using kappa value. RESULTS: A novel classification method for DCF was developed, manifesting the avulsion or rupture of conoid and trapezoid ligaments, and involvement of AC joint. Forty‐five cases of DCFs were included in this study. Among them, 11 (24.4%) were Type 1 fracture, three (6.7%) cases were Type 2, six cases (13.3%) were Type 3, 21 (46.7%) were Type 4, four (8.9%) were Type 5. Kappa values for inter‐observer agreement were 0.57 after first evaluation and 0.61 after second evaluation. Intra‐observer agreement was 0.72 for experienced shoulder specialist and 0.63 for radiologist. CONCLUSION: This new classification method is reliable to use, supplementary to current classification systems, and emphasizes on the osteoligamentous complex injury when opting for the treatment. |
---|