The effect of addition of 2DCT scans and 3DCT scans for the classification of tibial plateau fractures: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: In this systematic review, we evaluate the effect of radiographs and 2D and 3D imaging techniques on the interobserver agreement of six commonly used classification systems for tibial plateau fractures. METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies regarding the effect of 2D and 3D imaging techniques on the interobserver agreement of tibial plateau classification systems. Studies validating new classification systems, not providing own data or only providing information on the interobserver agreement for radiographs were excluded. Studies were scored based on the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Our review analysed 14 studies on different classification systems used for tibial plateau fractures in clinical practice, with the Schatzker classification being the most commonly used classification system. The results showed that the addition of 2D CT led to a significant improvement of interobserver agreement for one study. However, other included studies showed varying levels of interobserver agreement, ranging from fair to substantial according to the interpretation by Landis and Koch. The addition of 3D CT resulted in a significant deterioration in one study for the Schatzker classification. Similar to the addition of 2D CT, the interobserver agreement for the Schatzker classification with the addition of 3D CT were heterogeneous ranging from fair to almost perfect according to the interpretation by Landis and Koch. CONCLUSIONS: The use of 2D CT can be recommended for classifying tibial plateau fractures with the Schatzker classification, AO/OTA classification and Hohl classification. The value of 3D CT on the interobserver agreement of commonly used classification systems remains uncertain and unproven. Therefore, we do not recommend the use of 3D CT for the classification of tibial plateau fractures. Overall, the advancement of imaging techniques is not in line with the advancement in interobserver agreement on fracture classification.

Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block provides improved short-term analgesia compared with the femoral nerve block in hip fracture surgery: a single-center double-blinded randomized comparative trial.

BACKGROUND: The femoral nerve block (FNB) may be used for analgesia in hip fracture surgery. The pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block is a novel regional technique and may provide better pain reduction while preserving motor function, but these blocks have not been directly compared. METHODS: In a single-center double-blinded randomized comparative trial, patients presenting for hip fracture surgery received analgesia with either FNB or PENG block. The primary outcome measure was pain scores (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 0 to 10). Secondary outcomes were postoperative quadriceps strength, opiate use, complications, length of hospital stay, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty patients were randomized and equally allocated between groups. Baseline demographics were similar. Postoperatively in recovery (day 0), the PENG group experienced less pain compared with the FNB group. (In the PENG group, 63% experienced no pain, 27% mild pain, and 10% moderate to severe pain. In comparison, 30% of the FNB group reported no pain, 27% mild pain, and 36% moderate to severe pain; p=0.04). This was assessed using an 11-point Likert NRS. Quadriceps strength was better preserved in the PENG group in the recovery unit (assessed using Oxford muscle strength grading, 60% intact in the PENG group vs none intact in the FNB group; p<0.001) and on day 1 (90% intact vs 50%, respectively; p=0.004). There was no difference in other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving a PENG block for intraoperative and postoperative analgesia during hip fracture surgery experience less postoperative pain in the recovery room with no difference detected by postoperative day 1. Quadriceps strength was better preserved with the PENG block. Despite the short-term analgesic benefit and improved quadriceps strength, there were no differences detected in the quality of recovery.

Risk factors for redisplacement of pediatric distal forearm and distal radius fractures.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the distal forearm and distal radius represent the most common types of fracture in the pediatric population, with the majority treated by closed reduction and cast. Redisplacement has been known to occur in up to 39% of cases. There have been numerous risk factors and radiologic indices put forward as methods of predicting redisplacement, but this topic remains a matter of debate. This retrospective study aims to further assess the significance of the many factors in redisplacement after treatment with closed reduction. METHODS: This retrospective study included 155 children with distal radius and forearm fractures. Age, sex, location of fracture, angulation, displacement, an associated ulna fracture, obliquity of fracture, and accuracy of reduction were measured for assessment as potential risk factors. In addition, the cast index, padding index, Canterbury index, second metacarpal-radius index, gap index, and 3-point index were measured on postreduction radiographs. RESULTS: Redisplacement occurred in 33 of the 155 cases (21.3%). Initial displacement and accuracy of the reduction were identified as significant risk factors for redisplacement. Initial displacement of >50% (of the radius width) was significantly associated with redisplacement (odds ratio of 5.4). Failure to achieve anatomic reduction was significantly higher in the redisplacement group (odds ratio 3.9). The only radiologic index that differed significantly between groups was the cast index, with more patients without redisplacement meeting the cut-off value (60% vs. 32%, P=0.010). DISCUSSION: Initial displacement of >50% and inability to achieve anatomic reduction are major risk factors for redisplacement. Given its effectiveness and ease of clinical application, the cast index remains the most useful measure of cast molding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II--Retrospective prognostic study.