A new classification of atlas fracture based on computed tomography: reliability, reproducibility, and preliminary clinical significance

Le résumé fourni par la source

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study. PURPOSE: This study aimed to observe the computed tomography (CT) characteristics of atlas fracture and propose a new CT classification system, evaluate its reliability and repeatability, and discuss its clinical significance. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The treatment and classification of atlas fracture remain controversial. At present, no classification method has been standardized for atlas fracture. Injury to the transverse atlantal ligament (TAL) and lateral mass displacement is still controversial. METHODS: Seventy-five patients with atlas fracture were included from January 2015 to December 2020. Based on the anatomy of the fracture line, atlas fractures were divided into three types. Each type was divided into two subtypes according to the fracture displacement. Unweighted Cohen kappa coefficients were applied to evaluate the reliability and reproducibility. RESULTS: According to the new classification, 17 cases of type A1, 12 of type A2, seven of type B1, 13 of type B2, 12 of type C1, and 14 of type C2 were identified. The K-values of the interobserver and intraobserver reliability were 0.846 and 0.912, respectively, for the new classification. The K-values of interobserver reliability for types A, B, and C were 0.843, 0.799, and 0.898, respectively. The K-values of intraobserver reliability for types A, B, and C were 0.888, 0.910, and 0.935, respectively. The mean K-values of the interobserver and intraobserver reliability for subtypes were 0.687 and 0.829, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The new classification of atlas fractures can cover nearly all atlas fractures. This system is the first to evaluate the severity of fractures based on the C1 articular facet and fracture displacement and strengthen the anatomy ring of the atlas. It is concise, easy to remember, reliable, and reproducible.

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