Cargando…

The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification

OBJECTIVE: Edelson classification is a 3D classification of proximal humeral fractures, but there is a scarcity of application of this classification in large samples, and the accuracy of classification was also not testified. The objective of this research was to verify whether a revised Edelson cl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Jialiang, Dong, Weichong, Zhou, Yali, Shang, Meishuang, Yang, Sifan, Zhang, Xiaojuan, Hou, Zhiyong, Zhang, Yingze
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/PMC9483048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924693
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13375
_version_ 1784791587755130880
author Guo, Jialiang
Dong, Weichong
Zhou, Yali
Shang, Meishuang
Yang, Sifan
Zhang, Xiaojuan
Hou, Zhiyong
Zhang, Yingze
author_facet Guo, Jialiang
Dong, Weichong
Zhou, Yali
Shang, Meishuang
Yang, Sifan
Zhang, Xiaojuan
Hou, Zhiyong
Zhang, Yingze
author_sort Guo, Jialiang
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Edelson classification is a 3D classification of proximal humeral fractures, but there is a scarcity of application of this classification in large samples, and the accuracy of classification was also not testified. The objective of this research was to verify whether a revised Edelson classification produces satisfactory agreement for proximal humeral fracture classification in adult patients. METHODS: A total of 827 proximal humeral fractures (304 male and 520 female patients, 58.0 ± 16.2 years) were found retrospectively from January 2014 to December 2019, and classified according to the traditional and newly proposed Edelson classification. The three‐dimensional CT images were processed, rotated and visualized within software. Five shoulder surgeons classified each fracture. After data collection, radiographic classifications results were compared by inter‐ and intraobserver analysis with the method of weighted kappa coefficients. Fracture classification based on Edelson and revised Edelson classification was presented and compared. RESULTS: The mean k value for the interobserver reliability was 0.748 (range, 0.583 to 0.958) compared with Edelson classification (0.548, range, 0.48 to 0.635), indicating satisfactory agreement. The mean k value for intraobserver reliability was 0.906 (range, 0.823 to 0.943) compared with Edelson classification (0.762, range, 0.666 to 0.808), indicating excellent agreement when using the newly revised Edelson classification. The mechanism was categorized as the shoulder being in a position of forward flexion, abduction, and internal rotation in Edelson I‐IV and bicipital fractures. For the greater tuberosity fracture, the mechanism was classified into two mechanisms based on the presence of a combined dislocation. Bicipital groove fracture is a commonly observed fracture pattern, and included in the revised Edelson classification. CONCLUSIONS: The revised Edelson classification proposed was more in line with the injury mechanism of the fracture, was beneficial in identifying more fracture types such as bicipital groove fracture, and verified to be a good proximal humeral fracture classification with good reliability compared with the traditional Edelson classification.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9483048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94830482022-09-29 The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification Guo, Jialiang Dong, Weichong Zhou, Yali Shang, Meishuang Yang, Sifan Zhang, Xiaojuan Hou, Zhiyong Zhang, Yingze Orthop Surg Research Articles OBJECTIVE: Edelson classification is a 3D classification of proximal humeral fractures, but there is a scarcity of application of this classification in large samples, and the accuracy of classification was also not testified. The objective of this research was to verify whether a revised Edelson classification produces satisfactory agreement for proximal humeral fracture classification in adult patients. METHODS: A total of 827 proximal humeral fractures (304 male and 520 female patients, 58.0 ± 16.2 years) were found retrospectively from January 2014 to December 2019, and classified according to the traditional and newly proposed Edelson classification. The three‐dimensional CT images were processed, rotated and visualized within software. Five shoulder surgeons classified each fracture. After data collection, radiographic classifications results were compared by inter‐ and intraobserver analysis with the method of weighted kappa coefficients. Fracture classification based on Edelson and revised Edelson classification was presented and compared. RESULTS: The mean k value for the interobserver reliability was 0.748 (range, 0.583 to 0.958) compared with Edelson classification (0.548, range, 0.48 to 0.635), indicating satisfactory agreement. The mean k value for intraobserver reliability was 0.906 (range, 0.823 to 0.943) compared with Edelson classification (0.762, range, 0.666 to 0.808), indicating excellent agreement when using the newly revised Edelson classification. The mechanism was categorized as the shoulder being in a position of forward flexion, abduction, and internal rotation in Edelson I‐IV and bicipital fractures. For the greater tuberosity fracture, the mechanism was classified into two mechanisms based on the presence of a combined dislocation. Bicipital groove fracture is a commonly observed fracture pattern, and included in the revised Edelson classification. CONCLUSIONS: The revised Edelson classification proposed was more in line with the injury mechanism of the fracture, was beneficial in identifying more fracture types such as bicipital groove fracture, and verified to be a good proximal humeral fracture classification with good reliability compared with the traditional Edelson classification. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2022-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9483048/ /pubmed/35924693 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13375 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Guo, Jialiang
Dong, Weichong
Zhou, Yali
Shang, Meishuang
Yang, Sifan
Zhang, Xiaojuan
Hou, Zhiyong
Zhang, Yingze
The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title_full The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title_fullStr The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title_full_unstemmed The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title_short The Reliability and Reproducibility of a New Revised Edelson Classification
title_sort reliability and reproducibility of a new revised edelson classification
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9483048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924693
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13375
work_keys_str_mv AT guojialiang thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT dongweichong thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhouyali thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT shangmeishuang thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT yangsifan thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhangxiaojuan thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT houzhiyong thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhangyingze thereliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT guojialiang reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT dongweichong reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhouyali reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT shangmeishuang reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT yangsifan reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhangxiaojuan reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT houzhiyong reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification
AT zhangyingze reliabilityandreproducibilityofanewrevisededelsonclassification