The Reliability of Classifications of Proximal Femoral Fractures with 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography: The New Concept of Comprehensive Classification

• Published in: Advances in Orthopedics 2014-01, Vol.2014 (2014), p.64-68
• Main Authors: Sasaki, Ken, Kawano, Tetsuya, Shimada, Yoichi, Kamo, Keiji, Suzuki, Noriyuki, Tani, Takayuki, Tazawa, Hiroshi, Kubota, Hitoshi, Konishi, Natsuo, Yamada, Shin, Kijima, Hiroaki, Okudera, Yoshihiko
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Classification; CT imaging; Diagnosis; Fractures; Investigations; Methods; Orthopedics; Tomography; X-rays
• ISSN: 2090-3464; 2090-3472; 2090-3472
• DOI: 10.1155/2014/359689

The reliability of proximal femoral fracture classifications using 3DCT was evaluated, and a comprehensive “area classification” was developed. Eleven orthopedists (5–26 years from graduation) classified 27 proximal femoral fractures at one hospital from June 2013 to July 2014 based on preoperative images. Various classifications were compared to “area classification.” In “area classification,” the proximal femur is divided into 4 areas with 3 boundary lines: Line-1 is the center of the neck, Line-2 is the border between the neck and the trochanteric zone, and Line-3 links the inferior borders of the greater and lesser trochanters. A fracture only in the first area was classified as a pure first area fracture; one in the first and second area was classified as a 1-2 type fracture. In the same way, fractures were classified as pure 2, 3-4, 1-2-3, and so on. “Area classification” reliability was highest when orthopedists with varying experience classified proximal femoral fractures using 3DCT. Other classifications cannot classify proximal femoral fractures if they exceed each classification’s particular zones. However, fractures that exceed the target zones are “dangerous” fractures. “Area classification” can classify such fractures, and it is therefore useful for selecting osteosynthesis methods.