Ralf Kraus, Michael Esser, Hagen Schmal, Florian Bergmann, Mike Trück, Hans Joachim Kirschner, Martin M Kaiser, Justus Lieber
{"title":"儿童和青少年肱骨远端冠状面剪切骨折:需要横断面成像和修订分类。","authors":"Ralf Kraus, Michael Esser, Hagen Schmal, Florian Bergmann, Mike Trück, Hans Joachim Kirschner, Martin M Kaiser, Justus Lieber","doi":"10.1055/a-2536-4682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The classification of fractures is necessary to ensure a reliable means of communication for clinical interaction, research, and education. Distal humeral coronal plane shear fractures (CSFs) are very rare in the growing-age population, despite that multiple classification schemes exist.The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intrarater reliability of the four most commonly used CSF classifications and their role in guiding treatment decisions in everyday clinical practice.Fifty-one patients with CSFs were retrospectively analyzed in a multicenter study. Of these, X-rays in two planes of 20 randomly selected CSFs were given to eight independent raters for classification according to Dubberley, Bryan and Morgan, Murthy, and AO. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess interrater agreement and intrarater consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Reliability values were classified as excellent (ICC ≥0.8), substantial (ICC 0.61-0.80), moderate (ICC 0.41-0.6), fair (ICC 0.2-0.4), slight (ICC 0.00-0.2), and poor (ICC <0.00).All patients received x-rays in two planes initially. Cross-sectional imaging was added in 76.5% of cases (CT 58.8%, MRI 11.7%, both 5.9%). Interrater reliabilities were classified as fair for Dubberley (ICC 0.354; 95% CI 0.198, 0.573) and Bryan and Morgan (ICC 0.357; 95% CI 0.200, 0.576), slight for AO (ICC 0.226; 95% CI 0.100, 0.434), and poor for Murthy (ICC -0.012; 95% CI -0.063, 0.102). The Dubberley subtype showed slight agreement at lower ICC values (ICC 0.024, 95% CI -0.041, 0.161). The intrarater agreement was moderate to substantial for most of the eight raters and did not differ between the four classification systems. The rate of surgical treatment was 49/51 patients.The most commonly used classification schemes for CSFs failed to achieve a substantial agreement among the raters. This is probably because the fracture patterns of CSF in adolescence and high adulthood differ significantly. An adaptation of the classification for pediatric and adolescent patients is necessary, but only for scientific purposes. Classification is not necessary for the clinical management of patients, as virtually all patients require surgical treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":56316,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pediatric Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"341-346"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distal Humeral Coronal Shear Fractures in Children and Adolescents: Need for Cross-Sectional Imaging and a Revised Classification.\",\"authors\":\"Ralf Kraus, Michael Esser, Hagen Schmal, Florian Bergmann, Mike Trück, Hans Joachim Kirschner, Martin M Kaiser, Justus Lieber\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2536-4682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The classification of fractures is necessary to ensure a reliable means of communication for clinical interaction, research, and education. Distal humeral coronal plane shear fractures (CSFs) are very rare in the growing-age population, despite that multiple classification schemes exist.The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intrarater reliability of the four most commonly used CSF classifications and their role in guiding treatment decisions in everyday clinical practice.Fifty-one patients with CSFs were retrospectively analyzed in a multicenter study. Of these, X-rays in two planes of 20 randomly selected CSFs were given to eight independent raters for classification according to Dubberley, Bryan and Morgan, Murthy, and AO. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess interrater agreement and intrarater consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Reliability values were classified as excellent (ICC ≥0.8), substantial (ICC 0.61-0.80), moderate (ICC 0.41-0.6), fair (ICC 0.2-0.4), slight (ICC 0.00-0.2), and poor (ICC <0.00).All patients received x-rays in two planes initially. Cross-sectional imaging was added in 76.5% of cases (CT 58.8%, MRI 11.7%, both 5.9%). Interrater reliabilities were classified as fair for Dubberley (ICC 0.354; 95% CI 0.198, 0.573) and Bryan and Morgan (ICC 0.357; 95% CI 0.200, 0.576), slight for AO (ICC 0.226; 95% CI 0.100, 0.434), and poor for Murthy (ICC -0.012; 95% CI -0.063, 0.102). The Dubberley subtype showed slight agreement at lower ICC values (ICC 0.024, 95% CI -0.041, 0.161). The intrarater agreement was moderate to substantial for most of the eight raters and did not differ between the four classification systems. The rate of surgical treatment was 49/51 patients.The most commonly used classification schemes for CSFs failed to achieve a substantial agreement among the raters. This is probably because the fracture patterns of CSF in adolescence and high adulthood differ significantly. An adaptation of the classification for pediatric and adolescent patients is necessary, but only for scientific purposes. Classification is not necessary for the clinical management of patients, as virtually all patients require surgical treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Pediatric Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"341-346\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Pediatric Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2536-4682\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pediatric Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2536-4682","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:骨折的分类是必要的,以确保可靠的沟通手段,临床互动,研究和教育。肱骨远端冠状面剪切骨折(CSF)在年龄增长的人群中非常罕见,尽管存在多种分类方案。目的:本研究的目的是评估4种最常用的脑脊液分类之间和内部的可靠性及其在日常临床实践中指导治疗决策的作用。材料和方法:在一项多中心研究中回顾性分析51例脑脊液患者。其中,随机选择20个脑脊液的两个平面的x光片,根据Dubberley, Bryan & Morgan, Murthy和AO,给8个独立的评分者进行分类。采用Cohens Kappa统计来评估评分者之间的一致性和评分者内部的一致性。计算类内相关系数(ICC)估计值和95%置信区间(CI)。可靠性值分为优秀(ICC≥0.8)、一般(ICC 0.61-0.80)、中等(ICC 0.41-0.6)、一般(ICC 0.2-0.4)、轻微(ICC 0.00-0.2)和差(ICC)。结果:所有患者最初均在2个平面接受x光检查。76.5%的病例增加了横断面成像(CT 58.8%, MRI 11.7%,两者均为5.9%)。评价者间信度在Dubberley被归类为公平(ICC 0,354;95% ci 0.198;0.573)和Bryan & Morgan (ICC 0.357;95% ci 0.200;0,576),轻微的AO (ICC 0,226;95% ci 0.100;0,434),而可怜的是墨菲(ICC -0,012;95% ci - 0.063;0102)。Dubberley亚型在较低的ICC值(ICC 0,024;95% ci - 0.041;0161)。8个评分者中的大多数评分者的内部一致是中等到实质性的,并且在四种分类系统之间没有差异。手术治愈率为49/51。结论:最常用的脑脊液分类方案未能在评分者之间取得实质性的一致。这可能是因为青春期和成年晚期脑脊液的骨折模式有很大不同。对儿童和青少年患者的分类进行调整是必要的,但只是为了科学目的。由于几乎所有的患者都需要手术治疗,因此对患者的临床管理没有必要进行分类。
Distal Humeral Coronal Shear Fractures in Children and Adolescents: Need for Cross-Sectional Imaging and a Revised Classification.
The classification of fractures is necessary to ensure a reliable means of communication for clinical interaction, research, and education. Distal humeral coronal plane shear fractures (CSFs) are very rare in the growing-age population, despite that multiple classification schemes exist.The aim of this study was to assess the inter- and intrarater reliability of the four most commonly used CSF classifications and their role in guiding treatment decisions in everyday clinical practice.Fifty-one patients with CSFs were retrospectively analyzed in a multicenter study. Of these, X-rays in two planes of 20 randomly selected CSFs were given to eight independent raters for classification according to Dubberley, Bryan and Morgan, Murthy, and AO. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess interrater agreement and intrarater consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Reliability values were classified as excellent (ICC ≥0.8), substantial (ICC 0.61-0.80), moderate (ICC 0.41-0.6), fair (ICC 0.2-0.4), slight (ICC 0.00-0.2), and poor (ICC <0.00).All patients received x-rays in two planes initially. Cross-sectional imaging was added in 76.5% of cases (CT 58.8%, MRI 11.7%, both 5.9%). Interrater reliabilities were classified as fair for Dubberley (ICC 0.354; 95% CI 0.198, 0.573) and Bryan and Morgan (ICC 0.357; 95% CI 0.200, 0.576), slight for AO (ICC 0.226; 95% CI 0.100, 0.434), and poor for Murthy (ICC -0.012; 95% CI -0.063, 0.102). The Dubberley subtype showed slight agreement at lower ICC values (ICC 0.024, 95% CI -0.041, 0.161). The intrarater agreement was moderate to substantial for most of the eight raters and did not differ between the four classification systems. The rate of surgical treatment was 49/51 patients.The most commonly used classification schemes for CSFs failed to achieve a substantial agreement among the raters. This is probably because the fracture patterns of CSF in adolescence and high adulthood differ significantly. An adaptation of the classification for pediatric and adolescent patients is necessary, but only for scientific purposes. Classification is not necessary for the clinical management of patients, as virtually all patients require surgical treatment.
期刊介绍:
This broad-based international journal updates you on vital developments in pediatric surgery through original articles, abstracts of the literature, and meeting announcements.
You will find state-of-the-art information on:
abdominal and thoracic surgery
neurosurgery
urology
gynecology
oncology
orthopaedics
traumatology
anesthesiology
child pathology
embryology
morphology
Written by surgeons, physicians, anesthesiologists, radiologists, and others involved in the surgical care of neonates, infants, and children, the EJPS is an indispensable resource for all specialists.