3D-printed Handheld Models Do Not Improve Recognition of Specific Characteristics and Patterns of Three-part and Four-part Proximal Humerus Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Reliably recognizing the overall pattern and specific characteristics of proximal humerus fractures may aid in surgical decision-making. With conventional onscreen imaging modalities, there is considerable and undesired interobserver variability, even when observers receive training in the application of the classification systems used. It is unclear whether three-dimensional (3D) models, which now can be fabricated with desktop printers at relatively little cost, can decrease interobserver variability in fracture classification. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Do 3D-printed handheld models of proximal humerus fractures improve agreement among residents and attending surgeons regarding (1) specific fracture characteristics and (2) patterns according to the Neer and Hertel classification systems? METHODS: Plain radiographs, as well as two-dimensional (2D) and 3D CT images, were collected from 20 patients (aged 18 years or older) who sustained a three-part or four-part proximal humerus fracture treated at a Level I trauma center between 2015 and 2019. The included images were chosen to comprise images from patients whose fractures were considered as difficult-to-classify, displaced fractures. Consequently, the images were assessed for eight fracture characteristics and categorized according to the Neer and Hertel classifications by four orthopaedic residents and four attending orthopaedic surgeons during two separate sessions. In the first session, the assessment was performed with conventional onscreen imaging (radiographs and 2D and 3D CT images). In the second session, 3D-printed handheld models were used for assessment, while onscreen imaging was also available. Although proximal humerus classifications such as the Neer classification have, in the past, been shown to have low interobserver reliability, we theorized that by receiving direct tactile and visual feedback from 3D-printed handheld fracture models, clinicians would be able to recognize the complex 3D aspects of classification systems reliably. Interobserver agreement was determined with the multirater Fleiss kappa and scored according to the categorical rating by Landis and Koch. To determine whether there was a difference between the two sessions, we calculated the delta (difference in the) kappa value with 95% confidence intervals and a two-tailed p value. Post hoc power analysis revealed that with the current sample size, a delta kappa value of 0.40 could be detected with 80% power at alpha = 0.05. RESULTS: Using 3D-printed models in addition to conventional imaging did not improve interobserver agreement of the following fracture characteristics: more than 2 mm medial hinge displacement, more than 8 mm metaphyseal extension, surgical neck fracture, anatomic neck fracture, displacement of the humeral head, more than 10 mm lesser tuberosity displacement, and more than 10 mm greater tuberosity displacement. Agreement regarding the presence of a humeral head-splitting fracture was improved but only to a level that was insufficient for clinical or scientific use (fair to substantial, delta kappa = 0.33 [95% CI 0.02 to 0.64]). Assessing 3D-printed handheld models adjunct to onscreen conventional imaging did not improve the interobserver agreement for pattern recognition according to Neer (delta kappa = 0.02 [95% CI -0.11 to 0.07]) and Hertel (delta kappa = 0.01 [95% CI -0.11 to 0.08]). There were no differences between residents and attending surgeons in terms of whether 3D models helped them classify the fractures, but there were few differences to identify fracture characteristics. However, none of the identified differences improved to almost perfect agreement (kappa value above 0.80), so even those few differences are unlikely to be clinically useful. CONCLUSION: Using 3D-printed handheld fracture models in addition to conventional onscreen imaging of three-part and four-part proximal humerus fractures does not improve agreement among residents and attending surgeons on specific fracture characteristics and patterns. Therefore, we do not recommend that clinicians expend the time and costs needed to create these models if the goal is to classify or describe patients' fracture characteristics or pattern, since doing so is unlikely to improve clinicians' abilities to select treatment or estimate prognosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

What are the patient-reported outcomes, functional limitations, and complications after lesser tuberosity fractures? a systematic review of 172 patients.

BACKGROUND: Lesser tuberosity fractures are relatively rare, with an incidence of 0.46 per 100,000 persons per year. This systematic review was performed to address patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), shoulder function, and complications after lesser tuberosity fractures in pediatric and adult patients, as well as patients with an associated posterior shoulder dislocation. Within these groups, identical outcomes were evaluated for nonoperative, surgical, acute and delayed treatment. METHOD: A comprehensive search was carried out in multiple databases. Articles were included if patients sustained a lesser tuberosity fracture without a concomitant proximal humerus fracture. There were no restrictions on age, type of treatment, fragment displacement, time to presentation, or associated injuries. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred forty-four records were screened for eligibility of which 71 studies were included (n = 172). Surgical treatment was provided to 50 of 62 (81%) pediatric patients, 49 of 66 (74%) adults, and 34 of 44 (77%) patients with an associated posterior shoulder dislocation. In the pediatric group, the mean of PROMs was 94 (range 70-100) and among adults 89 (range 85-100). In the posterior shoulder dislocation group, 89% did not regain full range of motion and the complication rate was 17%. In pediatric patients, surgery was associated with fewer complications (P = .021) compared to nonoperative treatment. CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients have excellent outcomes after lesser tuberosity fractures and respond well to surgical treatment. Adults have acceptable outcomes but patients with an associated posterior shoulder dislocation have impaired range of shoulder movement and are more likely to develop complications.

[The limping child: a red flag for every physician]. / Het mankend kind: een rode vlag voor iedere medicus.

A limping gait pattern in a child is a red flag for every physician until proven otherwise. Among the most common causes are coxitis fugax, infection (septic arthritis, osteomyelitis), Perthes disease, and slipped capital femoral epiphysis, depending on the age of the patient. A high index of suspicion is required because clinical findings are often subtle, and the diagnosis may be present even if initial radiographs are negative. A missed or delayed diagnosis may have devastating consequences. Therefore, this paper describes the main characteristics of different causes of a limping child, based on four typical cases. Tools are provided to recognize each diagnosis. Early referral to a paediatric orthopaedic surgeon is recommended.