The IDEAL classification system: a new method for classifying fractures of the distal extremity of the radius - description and reproducibility

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE There is no consensus concerning which classification for distal radius fractures is best and the existing methods present poor reproducibility. This study aimed to describe and assess the reproducibility of the new IDEAL classification, and to compare it with widely used systems. DESIGN AND SETTING Reproducibility study, Hand Surgery Section, Universidade Federal de São Paulo. METHODS The IDEAL classification and its evidence-based rationale are presented. Sixty radiographs (posteroanterior and lateral) from patients with distal radius fractures were classified by six examiners: a hand surgery specialist, a hand surgery resident, an orthopedic generalist, an orthopedic resident and two medical students. Each of them independently assessed the radiographs at three different times. We compared the intra and interobserver concordance of the IDEAL, AO, Frykman and Fernandez classifications using Cohen's kappa (κ) (for two observers) and Fleiss's κ (for more than two observers). RESULTS The concordance was high for the IDEAL classification (κ = 0.771) and moderate for Frykman (κ = 0.556), Fernandez (κ = 0.671) and AO (κ = 0.650). The interobserver agreement was moderate for the IDEAL classification (κ = 0.595), but unsatisfactory for Frykman (κ = 0.344), Fernandez (κ = 0.496) and AO (κ = 0.343). CONCLUSION The reproducibility of the IDEAL classification was better than that of the other systems analyzed, thus making the IDEAL system suitable for application. Complementary studies will confirm whether this classification system makes adequate predictions for therapy and prognosis.

Assessing forearm fracture risk in postmenopausal women

A diverse array of bone density, structure, and strength parameters were significantly associated with distal forearm fractures in postmenopausal women, but most of them were also correlated with femoral neck areal bone mineral density (aBMD), which provides an adequate measure of bone fragility at the wrist for routine clinical purposes.

INTRODUCTION

This study seeks to test the clinical utility of approaches for assessing forearm fracture risk.

METHODS

Among 100 postmenopausal women with a distal forearm fracture (cases) and 105 with no osteoporotic fracture (controls), we measured aBMD and assessed radius volumetric bone mineral density, geometry, and microstructure; ultradistal radius failure load was evaluated in microfinite element (microFE) models.

RESULTS

Fracture cases had inferior bone density, geometry, microstructure, and strength. The most significant determinant of fracture in five categories were bone density (femoral neck aBMD; odds ratio (OR) per standard deviation (SD), 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4-2.8), geometry (cortical thickness; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1), microstructure (structure model index (SMI); OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7), and strength (microFE failure load; OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5); the factor-of-risk (applied load in a forward fall / microFE failure load) was 15% worse in cases (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6). Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) ranged from 0.62 to 0.68. The predictors of forearm fracture risk that entered a multivariable model were femoral neck aBMD and SMI (combined AUC, 0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Detailed bone structure and strength measurements provide insight into forearm fracture pathogenesis, but femoral neck aBMD performs adequately for routine clinical risk assessment.

Fractures of the distal radius (Colles' fracture)

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

Although Colles' fracture is a common clinical situation for the orthopedist, we did not find any information in the literature that would allow safe decision-making on the best treatment for each fracture type. The aim of the present study was to investigate Brazilian orthopedists' opinions regarding the main aspects of treatments for Colles' fracture.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cross-sectional study conducted during the 34th Brazilian Congress of Orthopedics and Traumatology.

METHODS

Five hundred questionnaires containing 12 items were randomly distributed to orthopedists who were attending the congress; 439 were filled out correctly and were considered in this study.

RESULTS

The main factors in making decisions on interventions in fracture cases were whether the fracture was intra-articular, the existence of shortening of the distal radius and the patient's age. The classification method most used was Frykmann. The closed reduction method most used was manual reduction. The principal surgical interventions were percutaneous pinning (39%), external fixation (27%) and volar plate (19%). Most of the interviewees only used bone grafts for osseous gaps in special cases. The most frequent complications were impairment of joint mobility and residual pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Brazilian orthopedists have concordant opinions regarding conservative treatment methods and the use of bone grafts. There were conflicting opinions regarding surgical treatment methods, classification types and complications.