Prediction of surface area size in orbital floor and medial orbital wall fractures based on topographical subregions.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study evaluates the occurrence and frequency of different fracture patterns in a series of computed tomography (CT) scans in terms of the AOCMF Trauma Classification (TC) orbit module and correlates the assigned defects with measurements of the fracture area in order to get an approximate guideline for fracture size predictions on the basis of the classification. MATERIAL AND METHODS: CT scans of patients with orbital floor fractures were evaluated using the AOCMFTC to determine the topographical subregions. The coding consisted of: W = orbital wall, 1 = anterior orbit, 2 = midorbit, i = inferior, m = medial. The 3-dimensional surface area size of the fractures was quantified by the "defect body" method (Brainlab, Munich, Germany). The fracture area size and its confidence and prediction interval within each topographical subregion was estimated by regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 137 CT scans exhibited 145 orbital floor fractures, which were combined with 34 medial orbital wall fractures in 31 patients. The floor fractures - W1(i)2(i) (n = 86) and W1(i) (n = 19) were the most frequent patterns. Combined floor and medial wall fractures most frequently corresponded to the pattern W1 (im)2 (im) (n = 15) ahead of W1 (im) 2(i) (n = 10). The surface area size ranged from 0.11 cm2 to 6.09 cm2 for orbital floor and from 0.29 cm2 to 5.43 cm2 for medial wall fractures. The prediction values of the mean fracture area size within the subregions were computed as follows: W1(i) = 2.25 cm2, W2(i) = 1.64 cm2, W1(i)2(i) = 3.10 cm2, W1(m) = 1.36 cm2, W2(m) = 1.65 cm2, W1(m)2(m) = 2.98 cm2, W1 (im) = 3.35 cm2, W1 (im) 2(i) = 4.63 cm2, W1 (im)2(m) = 4.06 cm2 and W1 (im)2 (im) = 7.16 cm2. CONCLUSION: The AOCMFTC orbital module offers a suitable framework for topographical allocation of fracture patterns inside the infero-medial orbital cavity. The involvement of the subregions is of predictive value providing estimations of the mean 3-D fracture area size.

Impact of osteosynthesis in fracture care: a cost comparison study.

Aim: To estimate the health economic impact of osteosynthesis (OS) in fracture care over six decades in 17 high-income countries. Patients & methods: Applying a decision tree model, we assumed a hypothetical absence of OS and compared OS (intervention) with conservative treatment (CONS; comparator). We included patients with femur, tibia and radius fractures (age <65 years) and for proximal femur fractures also elderly patients (≥70 years). Results: We estimated savings in direct and indirect costs of 855 billion Swiss francs in the working age population in addition to 4.6 million years of life gained. In the elderly population, 69 billion Swiss francs were saved in direct costs of proximal femur fractures in addition to 73 million years of life gained. Conclusion: OS contributed to maximize health gains of society.

The impact of the AO Foundation on fracture care: An evaluation of 60 years AO Foundation.

OBJECTIVES: Sixty years ago, the Association of Osteosynthesis (AO) was founded with the aim to improve fracture treatment and has since grown into one of the largest medical associations worldwide. Aim of this study was to evaluate AO's impact on science, education, patient care and the MedTech business. DESIGN/METHODS: Impact evaluations were conducted as appropriate for the individual domains: Impact on science was measured by analyzing citation frequencies of publications promoted by AO. Impact on education was evaluated by analyzing the evolution of number and location of AO courses. Impact on patient care was evaluated with a health economic model analyzing cost changes and years of life gained through the introduction of osteosynthesis in 17 high-income countries (HICs). Impact on MedTech business was evaluated by analyzing sales data of AO-associated products. RESULTS: Thirty-five AO papers and 2 major AO textbooks are cited at remarkable frequencies in high ranking journals with up to 2000 citations/year. The number of AO courses steadily increased with a total of 645'000 participants, 20'000 teaching days and 2'500 volunteer faculty members so far. The introduction of osteosynthesis saved at least 925 billion Swiss Francs [CHF] in the 17 HICs analyzed and had an impact on avoiding premature deaths comparable to the use of antihypertensive drugs. AO-associated products generated sales of 55 billion CHF. CONCLUSION: AO's impact on science, education, patient care, and the MedTech business was significant because AO addressed hitherto unmet needs by combining activities that mutually enriched and reinforced each other.

The First AO Classification System for Fractures of the Craniomaxillofacial Skeleton: Rationale, Methodological Background, Developmental Process, and Objectives.

Validated trauma classification systems are the sole means to provide the basis for reliable documentation and evaluation of patient care, which will open the gateway to evidence-based procedures and healthcare in the coming years. With the support of AO Investigation and Documentation, a classification group was established to develop and evaluate a comprehensive classification system for craniomaxillofacial (CMF) fractures. Blueprints for fracture classification in the major constituents of the human skull were drafted and then evaluated by a multispecialty group of experienced CMF surgeons and a radiologist in a structured process during iterative agreement sessions. At each session, surgeons independently classified the radiological imaging of up to 150 consecutive cases with CMF fractures. During subsequent review meetings, all discrepancies in the classification outcome were critically appraised for clarification and improvement until consensus was reached. The resulting CMF classification system is structured in a hierarchical fashion with three levels of increasing complexity. The most elementary level 1 simply distinguishes four fracture locations within the skull: mandible (code 91), midface (code 92), skull base (code 93), and cranial vault (code 94). Levels 2 and 3 focus on further defining the fracture locations and for fracture morphology, achieving an almost individual mapping of the fracture pattern. This introductory article describes the rationale for the comprehensive AO CMF classification system, discusses the methodological framework, and provides insight into the experiences and interactions during the evaluation process within the core groups. The details of this system in terms of anatomy and levels are presented in a series of focused tutorials illustrated with case examples in this special issue of the Journal.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Mandible Fractures- Level 2 Tutorial.

This tutorial outlines the details of the AOCMF image-based classification system for fractures of the mandible at the precision level 2 allowing description of their topographical distribution. A short introduction about the anatomy is made. Mandibular fractures are classified by the anatomic regions involved. For this purpose, the mandible is delineated into an array of nine regions identified by letters: the symphysis/parasymphysis region anteriorly, two body regions on each lateral side, combined angle and ascending ramus regions, and finally the condylar and coronoid processes. A precise definition of the demarcation lines between these regions is given for the unambiguous allocation of fractures. Four transition zones allow an accurate topographic assignment if fractures end up in or run across the borders of anatomic regions. These zones are defined between angle/ramus and body, and between body and symphysis/parasymphysis. A fracture is classified as "confined" as long as it is located within a region, in contrast to a fracture being "nonconfined" when it extents to an adjoining region. Illustrations and case examples of mandible fractures are presented to become familiar with the classification procedure in daily routine.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Midface Fractures - Level 2 Tutorial.

The AOCMF Classification Group developed a hierarchical three-level craniomaxillofacial classification system with increasing level of complexity and details. The highest level 1 system distinguish four major anatomical units including the mandible (code 91), midface (code 92), skull base (code 93), and cranial vault (code 94). This tutorial presents the level 2 system for the midface unit that concentrates on the location of the fractures within defined regions in the central (upper, intermediate, and lower) and lateral (zygoma, pterygoid) midface, as well as the internal orbit and palate. The level 2 midface fracture location outlines the topographic boundaries of the anatomical regions. The common nasoorbitoethmoidal and zygoma en bloc fracture patterns, as well as the time-honored Le Fort classification are taken into account. This tutorial is organized in a sequence of sections dealing with the description of the classification system with illustrations of the topographical cranial midface regions along with rules for fracture location and coding, a series of case examples with clinical imaging and a general discussion on the design of this classification. Individual fracture mapping in these regions regarding severity, fragmentation, displacement of the fragment or bone defect is addressed in a more detailed level 3 system in the subsequent articles.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Mandible Fractures-Level 3 Tutorial.

This tutorial outlines the details of the AOCMF image-based classification system for fractures of the mandibular arch (i.e. the non-condylar mandible) at the precision level 3. It is the logical expansion of the fracture allocation to topographic mandibular sites outlined in level 2, and is based on three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques/computed tomography (CT)/cone beam CT). Level 3 allows an anatomical description of the individual conditions of the mandibular arch such as the preinjury dental state and the degree of alveolar atrophy. Trauma sequelae are then addressed: (1) tooth injuries and periodontal trauma, (2) fracture involvement of the alveolar process, (3) the degree of fracture fragmentation in three categories (none, minor, and major), and (4) the presence of bone loss. The grading of fragmentation needs a 3D evaluation of the fracture area, allowing visualization of the outer and inner mandibular cortices. To document these fracture features beyond topography the alphanumeric codes are supplied with distinctive appendices. This level 3 tutorial is accompanied by a brief survey of the peculiarities of the edentulous atrophic mandible. Illustrations and a few case examples serve as instruction and reference to improve the understanding and application of the presented features.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Midface Fractures - Level 3 Tutorial.

This tutorial outlines the details of the AOCMF image-based classification system for fractures of the midface at the precision level 3. The topography of the different midface regions (central midface-upper central midface, intermediate central midface, lower central midface-incorporating the naso-orbito-ethmoid region; lateral midface-zygoma and zygomatic arch, palate) is subdivided in much greater detail than in level 2 going beyond the Le Fort fracture types and its analogs. The level 3 midface classification system is presented along with guidelines to precisely delineate the fracture patterns in these specific subregions. It is easy to plot common fracture entities, such as nasal and naso-orbito-ethmoid, and their variants due to the refined structural layout of the subregions. As a key attribute, this focused approach permits to document the occurrence of fragmentation (i.e., single vs. multiple fracture lines), displacement, and bone loss. Moreover, the preinjury dental state and the degree of alveolar atrophy in edentulous maxillary regions can be recorded. On the basis of these individual features, tooth injuries, periodontal trauma, and fracture involvement of the alveolar process can be assessed. Coding rules are given to set up a distinctive formula for typical midface fractures and their combinations. The instructions and illustrations are elucidated by a series of radiographic imaging examples. A critical appraisal of the design of this level 3 midface classification is made.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Orbital Fractures - Level 3 Tutorial.

The AOCMF Classification Group developed a hierarchical three-level craniomaxillofacial classification system with increasing level of complexity and details. Within the midface (level 1 code 92), the level 2 system describes the location of the fractures within defined regions in the central and lateral midface including the internal orbit. This tutorial outlines the level 3 detailed classification system for fractures of the orbit. It depicts the orbital fractures according to the subregions defined as orbital rims, anterior orbital walls, midorbit, and apex. The system allows documentation of the involvement of specific orbital structures such as inferior orbital fissure, internal orbital buttress, the greater wing of sphenoid, lacrimal bone, superior orbital fissure, and optic canal. The classification system is presented along with rules for fracture location and coding, a series of case examples with clinical imaging and a general discussion on the design of this classification.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification: Skull Base and Cranial Vault Fractures - Level 2 and 3 Tutorial.

The AOCMF Classification Group developed a hierarchical three-level craniomaxillofacial classification system with increasing level of complexity and details. The highest level 1 system distinguish four major anatomical units, including the mandible (code 91), midface (code 92), skull base (code 93), and cranial vault (code 94). This tutorial presents the level 2 and more detailed level 3 systems for the skull base and cranial vault units. The level 2 system describes fracture location outlining the topographic boundaries of the anatomic regions, considering in particular the endocranial and exocranial skull base surfaces. The endocranial skull base is divided into nine regions; a central skull base adjoining a left and right side are divided into the anterior, middle, and posterior skull base. The exocranial skull base surface and cranial vault are divided in regions defined by the names of the bones involved: frontal, parietal, temporal, sphenoid, and occipital bones. The level 3 system allows assessing fracture morphology described by the presence of fracture fragmentation, displacement, and bone loss. A documentation of associated intracranial diagnostic features is proposed. This tutorial is organized in a sequence of sections dealing with the description of the classification system with illustrations of the topographical skull base and cranial vault regions along with rules for fracture location and coding, a series of case examples with clinical imaging and a general discussion on the design of this classification.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Classification and Documentation within AOCOIAC Software.

The AOCMF Classification Group developed a hierarchical three-level craniomaxillofacial (CMF) fracture classification system. The fundamental level 1 distinguishes four major anatomical units including the mandible (code 91), midface (code 92), skull base (code 93) and cranial vault (code 94); level 2 relates to the location of the fractures within defined topographical regions within each units; level 3 relates to fracture morphology in these regions regarding fragmentation, displacement, and bone defects, as well as the involvement of specific anatomical structures. The resulting CMF classification system has been implemented into AO comprehensive injury automatic classifier (AOCOIAC) software allowing for fracture classification as well as clinical documentation of individual cases including a selected sample of diagnostic images. This tutorial highlights the main features of the software. In addition, a series of illustrative case examples is made available electronically for viewing and editing.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Radiological Issues and Systematic Approach.

The AOCMF Classification Group developed a hierarchical three-level craniomaxillofacial (CMF) classification system with increasing level of complexity and details. The basic level 1 system differentiates fracture location in the mandible (code 91), midface (code 92), skull base (code 93), and cranial vault (code 94); the levels 2 and 3 focus on defining fracture location and morphology within more detailed regions and subregions. Correct imaging acquisition, systematic analysis, and interpretation according to the anatomic and surgical relevant structures in the CMF regions are essential for an accurate, reproducible, and comprehensive diagnosis of CMF fractures using that system. Basic principles for radiographic diagnosis are based on conventional plain films, multidetector computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In this tutorial, the radiological issues according to each level of the classification are described.

The Comprehensive AOCMF Classification System: Fracture Case Collection, Diagnostic Imaging Work Up, AOCOIAC Iconography and Coding.

The AO classification system for fractures in the adult craniomaxillofacial (CMF) skeleton is organized in anatomic modules in a 3 precision-level hierarchy with account for an increasing complexity and details. Level-1 is most elementary and identifies no more than the presence of fractures in 4 separate anatomical units: the mandible (code 91), midface (92), skull base (93) and cranial vault (94). Level-2 relates the detailed topographic location of the fractures within defined regions of the mandible, central and lateral midface, internal orbit, endo- and exocranial skull base, and the cranial vault. Level-3 is based on an even more refined topographic assessment and focuses on the morphology - fragmentation, displacement, and bone defects - within specified subregions. An electronic fracture case collection complements the preceding tutorial papers, which explain the features and options of the AOCMF classification system in this issue of the Journal. The electronic case collection demonstrates a range of representative osseous CMF injuries on the basis of diagnostic images, narrative descriptions of the fracture diagnosis and their classification using the icons for illustration and coding of a dedicated software AOCOIAC (AO Comprehensive Injury Automatic Classifier). Ninety four case examples are listed in two tables for a fast overview of the electronic content. Each case can serve as a guide to getting started with the new AOCMF classification system using AOCOIAC software and to employ it in the own clinical practice.

Treatment of severe atrophy of the maxilla with the prefabricated free vascularized fibula flap.

Treatment of severe maxillary atrophy despite complex major surgery often ends up with an unsatisfactory result. This paper presents the augmentation of the maxilla with a prefabricated free vascularized fibula flap in combination with ITI implants (Straumann AG, Waldenburg, Switzerland) in 4 patients. The technique of prefabrication for the reconstruction of maxillofacial defects is described based on the experience with 17 patients. The key points of this treatment are i) preoperative planning and fabrication of the drilling template; ii) prefabrication of the fibula with ITI implants and performing of a 'vestibuloplasty" using a skin graft; iii) technical construction and fabrication of the suprastructure and the denture; iv) reconstruction of the maxilla using the prefabricated fibula as free vascularized flap. The reconstructions with the fibula flaps were successful and the 18 ITI implants that have been inserted showed good osseointegration without loss of attachment in all 4 patients after a mean observation period of 12 months.