header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Trauma

The ongoing relevance of acetabular fracture classification



Download PDF

Abstract

The most widely used classification system for acetabular fractures was developed by Judet, Judet and Letournel over 50 years ago primarily to aid surgical planning. As population demographics and injury mechanisms have altered over time, the fracture patterns also appear to be changing. We conducted a retrospective review of the imaging of 100 patients with a mean age of 54.9 years (19 to 94) and a male to female ratio of 69:31 seen between 2010 and 2013 with acetabular fractures in order to determine whether the current spectrum of injury patterns can be reliably classified using the original system.

Three consultant pelvic and acetabular surgeons and one senior fellow analysed anonymous imaging. Inter-observer agreement for the classification of fractures that fitted into defined categories was substantial, (κ = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.76) with improvement to near perfect on inclusion of CT imaging (κ = 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.91). However, a high proportion of injuries (46%) were felt to be unclassifiable by more than one surgeon; there was moderate agreement on which these were (κ = 0.42 95% CI 0.31 to 0.54).

Further review of the unclassifiable fractures in this cohort of 100 patients showed that they tended to occur in an older population (mean age 59.1 years; 22 to 94 vs 47.2 years; 19 to 94; p = 0.003) and within this group, there was a recurring pattern of anterior column and quadrilateral plate involvement, with or without an incomplete posterior element injury.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1139–43.


Correspondence should be sent to Mr J. R. B. Hutt; e-mail:

For access options please click here