Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Straße 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Department of Trauma-, Hand-, Plastic- and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacher Straße 6, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Mar 1;23(1):189. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05146-7.
Morphology and glenoid involvement determine the necessity of surgical management in scapula fractures. While being present in only a small share of patients with shoulder trauma, numerous classification systems have been in use over the years for categorization of scapula fractures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the established AO/OTA classification in comparison to the classification system of Euler and Rüedi (ER) with regard to interobserver reliability and confidence in clinical practice.
Based on CT imaging, 149 patients with scapula fractures were retrospectively categorized by two trauma surgeons and two radiologists using the classification systems of ER and AO/OTA. To measure the interrater reliability, Fleiss kappa (κ) was calculated independently for both fracture classifications. Rater confidence was stated subjectively on a five-point scale and compared with Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Additionally, we computed the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) based on absolute agreement in a two-way random effects model to assess the diagnostic confidence agreement between observers.
In scapula fractures involving the glenoid fossa, interrater reliability was substantial (κ = 0.722; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.676-0.769) for the AO/OTA classification in contrast to moderate agreement (κ = 0.579; 95% CI 0.525-0.634) for the ER classification system. Diagnostic confidence for intra-articular fracture patterns was superior using the AO/OTA classification compared to ER (p < 0.001) with higher confidence agreement (ICC: 0.882 versus 0.831). For extra-articular fractures, ER (κ = 0.817; 95% CI 0.771-0.863) provided better interrater reliability compared to AO/OTA (κ = 0.734; 95% CI 0.692-0.776) with higher diagnostic confidence (p < 0.001) and superior agreement between confidence ratings (ICC: 0.881 versus 0.912).
The AO/OTA classification is most suitable to categorize intra-articular scapula fractures with glenoid involvement, whereas the classification system of Euler and Rüedi appears to be superior in extra-articular injury patterns with fractures involving only the scapula body, spine, acromion and coracoid process.
形态学和肩胛盂受累决定了肩胛骨骨折是否需要手术治疗。虽然在肩部创伤患者中仅占一小部分,但多年来已经有许多分类系统用于肩胛骨骨折的分类。本研究的目的是评估 AO/OTA 分类与 Euler 和 Rüedi(ER)分类系统在观察者间可靠性和临床实践置信度方面的差异。
基于 CT 影像学,由两名创伤外科医生和两名放射科医生使用 ER 和 AO/OTA 分类系统对 149 例肩胛骨骨折患者进行回顾性分类。为了测量观察者间的可靠性,分别为两种骨折分类计算 Fleiss κ(κ)。观察者的信心以五分制主观陈述,并与 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验进行比较。此外,我们还基于双向随机效应模型的绝对一致性计算了组内相关系数(ICC),以评估观察者之间的诊断置信度一致性。
在涉及肩胛盂的肩胛骨骨折中,AO/OTA 分类的观察者间可靠性为中等(κ=0.722;95%置信区间[CI] 0.676-0.769),而 ER 分类系统的观察者间可靠性为适度(κ=0.579;95% CI 0.525-0.634)。与 ER 分类系统相比,AO/OTA 分类系统对关节内骨折模式的诊断信心更高(p<0.001),且具有更高的置信一致性(ICC:0.882 与 0.831)。对于关节外骨折,ER(κ=0.817;95% CI 0.771-0.863)的观察者间可靠性优于 AO/OTA(κ=0.734;95% CI 0.692-0.776),且诊断信心更高(p<0.001),且置信评分之间的一致性更好(ICC:0.881 与 0.912)。
AO/OTA 分类最适合于分类涉及肩胛盂的关节内肩胛骨骨折,而 Euler 和 Rüedi 分类系统在仅涉及肩胛骨体、脊柱、肩峰和喙突的关节外损伤模式中表现更为优越。