Computed tomography-based prediction of the straight antegrade humeral nail's entry point and exposure of "critical types": truth or fiction?

BACKGROUND: Straight antegrade intramedullary nailing of proximal humerus fractures has shown promising clinical results. However, up to 36% of all humeri seem to be "critical types" in terms of the potential violation of the supraspinatus (SSP) tendon footprint by the nail's insertion zone. The aims of this study were to evaluate if a computed tomography (CT) scan could reliably predict the nail's entry point on the humeral head and if it would be possible to preoperatively estimate the individual risk of iatrogenic violation of the SSP tendon footprint by evaluating the uninjured contralateral humerus. METHODS: Twenty matched pairs of human cadaveric shoulders underwent CT scans, and the entry point for an antegrade nail as well as measurements regarding critical distances between the entry point and the rotator cuff were determined. Next, gross anatomic measurements of the same data were performed and compared. Furthermore, specimens were reviewed for critical types. RESULTS: Overall, 42.5% of all specimens were found to be critical types. The CT measurements exhibited excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.90). Similarly, excellent agreement between the CT scan and gross anatomic measurements in contralateral shoulders (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.88) was found. CONCLUSION: Assessing the uninjured contralateral side, CT can reliably predict the entry point in antegrade humeral nailing and preoperatively identify critical types of humeral heads at risk of iatrogenic implantation damage to the SSP tendon footprint. This study may help surgeons in the decision-making processon which surgical technique should be used without putting the patient at risk for iatrogenic, implant-related damage to the rotator cuff.

Inter- and intraobserver agreement of three classification systems for lateral clavicle fractures - reliability comparison between two specialist groups.

BACKGROUND: Although of great value in the management of lateral clavicle fractures, substantial variation in their classification exists. We performed a retrospective study to address the inter- and intraobserver reliability of three different classification systems for lateral clavicle fractures. METHODS: Radiographs of 20 lateral clavicle fractures that represented a full spectrum of adult fracture patterns were graded by five experienced radiologists and five experienced trauma surgeons according to the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), the Neer, and the Jäger/Breitner classification systems. This evaluation was performed at two different time points separated by 3 months. To measure the observer agreement, the Fleiss kappa coefficient (κ) was applied and assessed according to the grading of Landis and Koch. RESULTS: The overall interobserver reliability showed a fair agreement in all three classification systems. For the OTA classification system, the interobserver agreement showed a mean kappa value of 0.338 ranging from 0.350 (radiologists) to 0.374 (trauma surgeons). Kappa values of the interobserver agreement for the Neer classification system ranged from 0.238 (trauma surgeons) to 0.276 (radiologists) with a mean κ of 0.278. The Jäger/Breitner classification system demonstrated a mean kappa value of 0.330 ranging from 0.306 (trauma surgeons) to 0.382 (radiologists).The overall intraobserver reliability was moderate for the OTA and the Jäger/Breitner classification systems, while the overall intraobserver reliability for the Neer classification system was fair.The kappa values of the intraobserver agreements showed, in all classification systems, a wide range with the OTA classification system ranging from 0.086 to 0.634, the Neer classification system ranging from 0.137 to 0.448, and a range from 0.154 to 0.625 of the Jäger/Breitner classification system. CONCLUSIONS: The low inter- and intraobserver agreement levels exhibited in all three classification systems by both specialist groups suggest that the tested lateral clavicle fracture classification systems are unreliable and, therefore, of limited value. We should recognize there is considerable inconsistency in how physicians classify lateral clavicle fractures and therefore any conclusions based on these classifications should be recognized as being somewhat subjective.