0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures is useful to identify patients who may require treatment with hemi- or total elbow arthroplasty

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Classification systems are only useful if there is agreement among observers. The purpose of this study is to introduce a simple and clinically applicable classification system – The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures (CCDHF) and to compare the interobserver and intraobserver agreement for this classification with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA), and the Sheffield classification systems. The primary objective of the new classification system is to distinguish fractures that may not be suitable for open reduction and internal fixation, necessitating treatment options such as elbow hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

          Methods

          Five consultant elbow surgeons assessed a consecutive series of 105 sets X-rays of distal humeral fractures on 2 occasions with at least 10 weeks interval. All X-rays were classified according to AO/OTA, Sheffield, and the CCDHF systems. The CCDHF system has been developed collaboratively by a panel of five experienced elbow surgeons. Based on consensus, the surgeons identified specific fracture characteristics where elbow hemiarthroplasty or TEA might be needed.

          Results

          The mean interobserver agreement was fair for AO/OTA and moderate for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The mean intraobserver agreement was moderate for AO/OTA and substantial for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The observers were uncertain about the classification in 29% of the cases with the AO/OTA classification, 15% with the Sheffield classification, and 12% with CCDHF.

          Conclusion

          The CCDHF demonstrated validity and clinical applicability and can assist surgeons in identifying fractures that may require hemiarthroplasty or TEA treatment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adult distal humeral metaphyseal fractures: epidemiology and results of treatment.

            To examine the epidemiology and results of treatment of fractures of the distal humeral metaphysis. Observational cohort study. An orthopaedic trauma unit, which provides all the fracture care for a well-defined catchment population. A consecutive series of 320 patients with distal humeral fractures admitted to the unit between January 1988 and June 1997. We adopted a protocol of open reduction and fixation of all displaced fractures (greater than 5 mm of displacement in any plane) in patients who were medically fit for anesthesia. Postoperative immobilization was a cylinder cast for 6 weeks. Patients with undisplaced fractures or who were medically unfit were also treated nonoperatively in cylinder casts for 6 weeks. Epidemiological examination of patient subgroups and the incidence of complications of treatment. The overall incidence of distal humeral fractures in adults during this time was 5.7 cases per 100,000 in the population per year with an almost equal male to female ratio. There was a bimodal age distribution, simple falls were the most common overall cause of fracture, and the majority of the fractures were extra-articular (AO/OTA type A) or complete articular fractures (AO/OTA type C). The risk of complications during treatment was generally low in most patients, and the majority healed their fractures uneventfully. Overall, 90.6% of fractures united within 12 weeks and just under half of the remaining 9.4% patients with union complications healed without requiring further operative intervention by 24 weeks. The risk of union complications was higher following high-energy injuries, open fractures, and nonoperative treatment. Although the AO/OTA classification was not predictive of union complications, the "low" transcondylar (type A2.3 and A3) and simple intercondylar fracture (type C1.3) configuration had a greater risk of union complications than the "high" subtype. The rate of infection, myositis ossificans, and other implant-related complications were higher following operative treatment of type C fractures than type A and B fractures. The epidemiology of a consecutive unselected series of adult distal humeral fractures is defined in this study. The majority of these fractures are best treated surgically by rigid open reduction and internal fixation, except for "low" Type A and C fractures, which have a higher risk of union complications. The role of total elbow arthroplasty to treat these more complex injuries requires further evaluation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Confidence Intervals for the Kappa Statistic

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JSES Int
                JSES Int
                JSES International
                Elsevier
                2666-6383
                16 April 2024
                July 2024
                16 April 2024
                : 8
                : 4
                : 915-920
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [b ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark
                [c ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Privathospitalet Danmark, Copenhagen, Denmark
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author: Ali Al-Hamdani, MD, Gentofte Hospital, Gentofte Hospitalsvej 1, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark. ali.kuthayer.khalil.al-hamdani@ 123456regionh.dk
                Article
                S2666-6383(24)00091-4
                10.1016/j.jseint.2024.03.016
                11258849
                39035674
                df6ecc66-a60a-411f-aa07-f89453ebfd08
                © 2024 The Author(s)

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Elbow

                classification,elbow,fractures,distal humerus,orif,elbow arthroplasty,elbow hemiarthroplasty,copenhagen

                Comments

                Comment on this article