Schroeder Gregory D, Kurd Mark F, Kepler Christopher K, Krieg James C, Wilson Jefferson R, Kleweno Conor P, Firoozabadi Reza, Bellabarba Carlo, Kandizoria Frank, Schnake Klause J, Rajesekaran S, Dvorak Marcel F, Chapman Jens R, Vialle Luiz R, Oner F C, Vaccaro Alexander R
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Department of Neurosurgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Global Spine J. 2016 Nov;6(7):686-694. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1580611. Epub 2016 Mar 17.
Survey study. To determine the global perspective on controversial aspects of sacral fracture classifications. While developing the AOSpine Sacral Injury Classification System, a survey was sent to all members of AOSpine and AOTrauma. The survey asked four yes-or-no questions to help determine the best way to handle controversial aspects of sacral fractures in future classifications. Chi-square tests were initially used to compare surgeons' answers to the four key questions of the survey, and then the data was modeled through multivariable logistic regression analysis. A total of 474 surgeons answered all questions in the survey. Overall 86.9% of respondents felt that the proposed hierarchical nature of injuries was appropriate, and 77.8% of respondents agreed that that the risk of neurologic injury is highest in a vertical fracture through the foramen. Almost 80% of respondents felt that the separation of injuries based on the integrity of L5-S1 facet was appropriate, and 83.8% of surgeons agreed that a nondisplaced sacral U fracture is a clinically relevant entity. This study determines the global perspective on controversial areas in the injury patterns of sacral fractures and demonstrates that the development of a comprehensive and universally accepted sacral classification is possible.
调查研究。为确定全球对骶骨骨折分类争议方面的看法。在制定AO脊柱骶骨损伤分类系统时,向AO脊柱和AO创伤的所有成员发送了一份调查问卷。该问卷提出了四个是或否的问题,以帮助确定在未来分类中处理骶骨骨折争议方面的最佳方法。最初使用卡方检验来比较外科医生对调查问卷四个关键问题的回答,然后通过多变量逻辑回归分析对数据进行建模。共有474名外科医生回答了调查问卷中的所有问题。总体而言,86.9%的受访者认为所提议的损伤分级性质是合适的,77.8%的受访者同意通过椎间孔的垂直骨折中神经损伤风险最高。近80%的受访者认为根据L5-S1小关节完整性对损伤进行分类是合适的,83.8%的外科医生同意无移位的骶骨U形骨折是一个具有临床相关性的实体。本研究确定了全球对骶骨骨折损伤模式中争议领域的看法,并表明制定一个全面且被普遍接受的骶骨分类是可能的。