Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2016
Involvement of the lesser sigmoid notch in elbow fracture dislocations.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kachooei Amir Reza, Mellema Jos J, Tarabochia Matthew A, Chen Neal, van Dijk C Niek, Ring David
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study addressed the primary null hypothesis that there is no difference in the articular surface area of the lesser sigmoid notch involved among Mayo classes. Secondarily, we analyzed the fracture line location and the pattern of lesser sigmoid notch articular surface involvement among Mayo classes.
METHODS: Using quantitative 3-dimensional computed tomography, we reconstructed and analyzed fractures involving the lesser sigmoid notch articular surface in 52 patients. Further, we assessed the surface area involved in the fracture, the number of fracture fragments, and the location and direction of the fracture lines. Coronoid fractures were classified according to Mayo types.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between Mayo types 1 and 2 in any characteristic of the involvement of the lesser sigmoid notch articular surface, whereas Mayo type 3 was significantly different from both Mayo types 1 and 2 in the area involved in the fracture (42% in Mayo type 3 vs. 9% in Mayo types 1 and 2), the number of articular fragments (>3 fragments in type 3 vs. 2 fragments in types 1 and 2), and the direction of fracture line (both horizontal and vertical lines in type 3 vs. only horizontal line in types 1 and 2).
CONCLUSION: Mayo type III results in a more complex fracture, which might need to be addressed directly or indirectly during open reduction with internal fixation of olecranon fracture dislocations because changes in the geometry of lesser sigmoid notch may affect the radioulnar joint if it remains incongruent.
METHODS: Using quantitative 3-dimensional computed tomography, we reconstructed and analyzed fractures involving the lesser sigmoid notch articular surface in 52 patients. Further, we assessed the surface area involved in the fracture, the number of fracture fragments, and the location and direction of the fracture lines. Coronoid fractures were classified according to Mayo types.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between Mayo types 1 and 2 in any characteristic of the involvement of the lesser sigmoid notch articular surface, whereas Mayo type 3 was significantly different from both Mayo types 1 and 2 in the area involved in the fracture (42% in Mayo type 3 vs. 9% in Mayo types 1 and 2), the number of articular fragments (>3 fragments in type 3 vs. 2 fragments in types 1 and 2), and the direction of fracture line (both horizontal and vertical lines in type 3 vs. only horizontal line in types 1 and 2).
CONCLUSION: Mayo type III results in a more complex fracture, which might need to be addressed directly or indirectly during open reduction with internal fixation of olecranon fracture dislocations because changes in the geometry of lesser sigmoid notch may affect the radioulnar joint if it remains incongruent.