Aims. The primary aim of this study was to address the hypothesis that fracture morphology might be more important than posterior malleolar fragment size in rotational type posterior malleolar ankle fractures (PMAFs). The secondary aim was to identify clinically important predictors of outcome for each respective PMAF-type, to challenge the current dogma that surgical decision-making should be based on fragment size. Methods. This observational prospective cohort study included 70 patients with operatively treated rotational type PMAFs, respectively: 23 Haraguchi Type I (large posterolateral-oblique), 22 Type II (two-part posterolateral and posteromedial), and 25 (avulsion-) Type III. There was no standardized protocol on how to address the PMAFs and CT-imaging was used to classify fracture morphology and quality of postoperative syndesmotic reduction. Quantitative 3D-CT (Q3DCT) was used to assess the quality of fracture reduction, respectively: the proportion of articular involvement; residual intra-articular: gap, step-off, and 3D-displacement; and residual gap and step-off at the fibular notch. These predictors were correlated with the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) at two-years follow-up. Results. Bivariate analyses revealed that fracture morphology (p = 0.039) as well as fragment size (p = 0.007) were significantly associated with the FAOS. However, in multivariate analyses, fracture morphology (p = 0.001) (but not fragment size (p = 0.432)) and the residual intra-articular gap(s) (p = 0.009) were significantly associated. Haraguchi Type-II PMAFs had poorer FAOS scores compared with Types I and III. Multivariate analyses identified the following independent predictors: step-off in Type I; none of the Q3DCT-measurements in Type II, and quality of syndesmotic reduction in small-avulsion Type III PMAFs. Conclusion. PMAFs are three separate entities based on fracture morphology, with different predictors of outcome for each PMAF type. The current debate on whether or not to fix PMAFs needs to be refined to determine which morphological subtype benefits from fixation. In PMAFs, fracture morphology should guide treatment instead of fragment size. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1229–1241

Aims

The purpose of this study was to develop a convolutional neural network (CNN) for fracture detection, classification, and identification of greater tuberosity displacement ≥ 1 cm, neck-shaft angle (NSA) ≤ 100°, shaft translation, and articular fracture involvement, on plain radiographs.

Aims

The treatment of late presenting fractures of the lateral humeral condyle in children remains controversial.

Aims

To evaluate whether an ultra-low-dose CT protocol can diagnose selected limb fractures as well as conventional CT (C-CT).

Most fractures of the radial head are stable undisplaced or minimally displaced partial fractures without an associated fracture of the elbow or forearm or ligament injury, where stiffness following non-operative management is the primary concern. Displaced unstable fractures of the radial head are usually associated with other fractures or ligament injuries, and restoration of radiocapitellar contact by reconstruction or prosthetic replacement of the fractured head is necessary to prevent subluxation or dislocation of the elbow and forearm. In fractures with three or fewer fragments (two articular fragments and the neck) and little or no metaphyseal comminution, open reduction and internal fixation may give good results. However, fragmented unstable fractures of the radial head are prone to early failure of fixation and nonunion when fixed. Excision of the radial head is associated with good long-term results, but in patients with instability of the elbow or forearm, prosthetic replacement is preferred.

This review considers the characteristics of stable and unstable fractures of the radial head, as well as discussing the debatable aspects of management, in light of the current best evidence.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:151–9.