External validation and revision of the Lafontaine criteria for unstable distal radius fractures: a retrospective study.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Pornpanit Dissaneewate, Phatklao Thanavirun, Yanin Tangjaroenpaisan, Kantapon Dissaneewate
{"title":"External validation and revision of the Lafontaine criteria for unstable distal radius fractures: a retrospective study.","authors":"Pornpanit Dissaneewate, Phatklao Thanavirun, Yanin Tangjaroenpaisan, Kantapon Dissaneewate","doi":"10.1186/s13018-025-05558-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Lafontaine criteria are the most commonly cited criteria for predicting unstable distal radius fractures. However, formal validation of the performance of these criteria remains limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the Lafontaine criteria as a diagnostic prediction rule for distal radius fractures, assess the inter-rater reliability and predictive ability of various parameters for distal radius instability, and develop new criteria for fracture instability using reliable and highly predictive factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 274 adult patients with acute distal radius fractures treated with closed reduction and immobilisation between January 2019 and December 2022. Patients who underwent immediate surgery, were lost to follow-up before 4 weeks, or had unacceptable alignment after reduction were excluded. The Lafontaine criteria were validated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Criteria with an AUROC > 0.7 were considered acceptable. The criteria were updated using risk factors with stronger associations in the multivariable logistic regression analysis, and the inter-rater reliability of potential predictors was evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age of the patients was 63 years; 78% were female. Redisplacement occurred in 39% of the cases. The AUROC for the Lafontaine criteria was 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.74). Multivariable logistic regression showed that age 56-74 years (odds ratio [OR] 3.92, 95% CI 1.82-9.16, p < 0.001) age > 74 years (OR 6.34, 95% CI 2.66-16.2, p < 0.001), associated ulna fracture (OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.92-2.84, p = 0.10), and initial radial shortening > 3 mm (OR 5.78, 95% CI 3.11-11.2, p < 0.001) were the strongest predictive factors of fracture instability. These predictors demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability, making them suitable for clinical use. Updating the model with these risk factors resulted in an AUROC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.82).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The performance of the Lafontaine criteria in discriminating unstable distal radius fractures was unacceptable in our study cohort. The updated criteria using age group (< 56 years, 56-74 years, and > 74 years), associated ulnar fractures, and initial radial shortening > 3 mm was found to have moderate discrimination; however, further research is warranted to improve the prediction and measurement reliability of fracture instability.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11804089/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-05558-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Lafontaine criteria are the most commonly cited criteria for predicting unstable distal radius fractures. However, formal validation of the performance of these criteria remains limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the Lafontaine criteria as a diagnostic prediction rule for distal radius fractures, assess the inter-rater reliability and predictive ability of various parameters for distal radius instability, and develop new criteria for fracture instability using reliable and highly predictive factors.

Methods: This retrospective study included 274 adult patients with acute distal radius fractures treated with closed reduction and immobilisation between January 2019 and December 2022. Patients who underwent immediate surgery, were lost to follow-up before 4 weeks, or had unacceptable alignment after reduction were excluded. The Lafontaine criteria were validated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Criteria with an AUROC > 0.7 were considered acceptable. The criteria were updated using risk factors with stronger associations in the multivariable logistic regression analysis, and the inter-rater reliability of potential predictors was evaluated.

Results: The median age of the patients was 63 years; 78% were female. Redisplacement occurred in 39% of the cases. The AUROC for the Lafontaine criteria was 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.74). Multivariable logistic regression showed that age 56-74 years (odds ratio [OR] 3.92, 95% CI 1.82-9.16, p < 0.001) age > 74 years (OR 6.34, 95% CI 2.66-16.2, p < 0.001), associated ulna fracture (OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.92-2.84, p = 0.10), and initial radial shortening > 3 mm (OR 5.78, 95% CI 3.11-11.2, p < 0.001) were the strongest predictive factors of fracture instability. These predictors demonstrated substantial inter-rater reliability, making them suitable for clinical use. Updating the model with these risk factors resulted in an AUROC of 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.82).

Conclusions: The performance of the Lafontaine criteria in discriminating unstable distal radius fractures was unacceptable in our study cohort. The updated criteria using age group (< 56 years, 56-74 years, and > 74 years), associated ulnar fractures, and initial radial shortening > 3 mm was found to have moderate discrimination; however, further research is warranted to improve the prediction and measurement reliability of fracture instability.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信