123 Classification System： Establishment and Preliminary Evaluation of CT-based Classification for Distal Radius Fracture

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Objective Establish a new classification system of distal radius fracture based on computed tomographic (CT), and evaluate its reliability and reproducibility preliminarily, and provide a new theoretical reference for clinicians to use the clinical classification system. Methods The imaging data and clinical data of 204 inpatients with distal radius fractures during 6 years from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2019 in orthopaedic department were analyzed retrospectively and classified based on CT. Three observers evaluated the image data of 48 randomly selected cases based on CT at different time nodes of T1 and T2. Cohen's kappa was used to calculate the consistency. At the last follow-up, patients' Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Patient Rated Risk Evaluation (PRWE), and VAS scores were collected. Results Among 204 cases, there were 12 cases of type 1, including 6 cases of type 1-D, 4 cases of type 1-V and 2 cases of type 1-R. There were 6 cases of type 2, including 2 cases of type 2-DV, 2 cases of type 2-DR and 2 cases of type 2-VR. There were 186 cases of type 3, including 32 cases of type 3 − 0, 127 cases of type 3 − 1 and 27 cases of type 3 − 2. There was no significant difference in DASH, PRWE and VAS scores among all types (P > 0.05). The results of interobserver reproducibility were kappa = 0.985, ICC = 0.984 in the first evaluation, kappa = 0.986, ICC = 0.986 in the second evaluation. The results of intraobserver reproducibility were O1 = 0.991, O2 = 0.991, O3 = 0.989 respectively. Conclusions The new classification system of distal radius fracture based on CT has theoretical and practical significance for incision selection, fracture reduction and internal fixation. 123 classification system is clear, comprehensive, easy to understand and remember. Moreover, it has higher interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility than other systems reported at present.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.