Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, PR China.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, PR China.
Injury. 2021 Jun;52(6):1500-1505. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.11.031. Epub 2020 Nov 21.
Given the drawbacks of a femoral intertrochanteric fracture classification based on 2-dimensional radiographic imaging, an artificial intelligence-based classification system- the Tang classification system-which uses 3-dimensional image analysis, has previously been developed. This study explored the reliability of the Tang classification by comparing the consistency of this classification with the conventional 2-dimensional femoral intertrochanteric fracture classification systems.
X-ray and computed tomography (CT) data of 258 patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures were classified by 6 orthopedic surgeons using the Evans, Jensen, AO/OTA, and Tang classification systems on 2 separate occasions, 1 month apart. Kappa statistics were used to evaluate the inter- and intraobserver differences in classifications.
When the interobserver reliability was based on X-ray image analysis, the Kappa values for the Evans, Jensen, AO/OTA, and Tang classifications were 0.54 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.53 ± 0.02 (moderate agreement), 0.46 ± 0.02 (moderate agreement), and 0.63 ± 0.02 (substantial agreement), respectively. When the interobserver reliability was based on CT images, the Kappa values of the Evans, Jensen, AO/OTA, and Tang classifications were 0.49 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.49 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.44 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.64 ± 0.02 (substantial agreement), respectively. For X-ray images, the intraobserver Kappa values for the Evans, Jensen, AO/OTA, and Tang classification were 0.53 ± 0.02 (moderate agreement), 0.54 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.45 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), and 0.65 ± 0.03 (substantial agreement), respectively. When intraobserver reliability was based on CT images, the Kappa values for the Evans, Jensen, AO/OTA, and Tang classification were 0.52 ± 0.03 (moderate agreement), 0.52 ± 0.02 (moderate agreement), 0.41 ± 0.02 (moderate agreement), and 0.63 ± 0.03(substantial agreement), respectively.
The current study suggests that the Tang classification system is more reliable than the Evans, Jensen, and AO/OTA classification systems for measuring intertrochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.
鉴于基于二维放射影像学的股骨转子间骨折分类存在缺陷,先前已经开发出一种基于人工智能的分类系统——唐分类系统,该系统使用三维图像分析。本研究通过比较唐分类与传统二维股骨转子间骨折分类系统的一致性,探讨了唐分类的可靠性。
对 258 例股骨转子间骨折患者的 X 射线和计算机断层扫描(CT)数据,由 6 名骨科医生使用 Evans、Jensen、AO/OTA 和唐分类系统,在相隔 1 个月的 2 次独立评估中进行分类。采用 Kappa 统计评估分类的组内和组间差异。
当基于 X 射线图像分析进行组间可靠性评估时,Evans、Jensen、AO/OTA 和唐分类的 Kappa 值分别为 0.54±0.03(中度一致)、0.53±0.02(中度一致)、0.46±0.02(中度一致)和 0.63±0.02(高度一致)。当基于 CT 图像进行组间可靠性评估时,Evans、Jensen、AO/OTA 和唐分类的 Kappa 值分别为 0.49±0.03(中度一致)、0.49±0.03(中度一致)、0.44±0.03(中度一致)和 0.64±0.02(高度一致)。对于 X 射线图像,Evans、Jensen、AO/OTA 和唐分类的组内 Kappa 值分别为 0.53±0.02(中度一致)、0.54±0.03(中度一致)、0.45±0.03(中度一致)和 0.65±0.03(高度一致)。当基于 CT 图像进行组内可靠性评估时,Evans、Jensen、AO/OTA 和唐分类的 Kappa 值分别为 0.52±0.03(中度一致)、0.52±0.02(中度一致)、0.41±0.02(中度一致)和 0.63±0.03(高度一致)。
本研究表明,唐分类系统在测量股骨近端转子间骨折方面比 Evans、Jensen 和 AO/OTA 分类系统更可靠。