The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy, the inter-rater agreement and raters’ certainty of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and radiography for the detection of scaphoid fractures. Our hypothesis is that the CBCT has a higher diagnostic accuracy for scaphoid fractures than radiography. We retrospectively analysed patients who underwent both radiography and CBCT examinations within 4 days to rule out a scaphoid fracture over a 2-year period in our institution. 4 blinded radiologists and orthopaedic surgeons independently rated the images regarding the presence of a scaphoid fracture. The reference standard was evaluated by two radiologists in a consensus reading. Inter-rater correlation was evaluated, pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated and compared. 102 patients met the inclusion criteria. 52% of them had a scaphoid fracture. The inter-rater correlation was higher in the CBCT compared to radiography (P < 0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were higher for CBCT than for radiography (P < 0.019). Observers’ fracture classifications showed a higher correlation with the reference standard in the CBCT. Observers’ certainty for fracture detection and classification were higher in the CBCT. CBCT shows a higher diagnostic accuracy for scaphoid fractures than radiography.
Background:Avoiding delay in the surgical management of pectoralis major (PM) ruptures optimizes outcomes. However, this is not always possible, and when a tear becomes chronic or when a subacute tear has poor tissue quality, a graft can facilitate reconstruction.Purpose:The primary aim was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of PM reconstruction with dermal allograft augmentation for chronic tears or for subacute tears with poor tissue quality. A second aim was to determine patient and surgical factors affecting outcome.Study Design:Case series; Level of evidence, 4.Methods:Nineteen consecutive patients (19 PM ruptures) with a mean ± SD age of 39.1 ± 8.4 years were retrospectively reviewed at 26.4 ± 16.0 months following PM tendon reconstruction with dermal allograft. Surgery was performed at 19.2 ± 41.2 months after injury (median, 7.6 months; range, 1.1-185.4 months). Several outcome scores were recorded pre- and postoperatively, including Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), as well as visual analog scale (VAS) (range, 0-10; 0 = no pain) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE). Range of motion, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test score, and complications/reoperations were recorded postoperatively.Results:Scores improved significantly for the DASH (preoperative, 34.9; postoperative, 8.0; P < .001) and VAS (preoperative, 5.0; postoperative, 1.5; P = .011). There was a trend toward improved SANE scores (preoperative, 15.0; postoperative, 80.0; P = .097), but the difference was not statistically significant, likely because of the small number of patients having preoperative SANE scores for review. Increased age was associated with higher VAS scores (r = 0.628, P = .016) and less forward flexion (r = –0.502, P = .048) and external rotation (r = –0.654, P = .006). Patients with workers’ compensation had lower scores for 3 measures: SANE (75.8 vs 88.4, P = .040), Constant (86.7 vs 93.4, P = .019), and ASES (81.9 vs 97.4, P = .016). Operating on the dominant extremity resulted in lower Constant scores (87.8 vs 95.4, P = .012). A 2-head tendon tear (107.5° vs 123.3°, P = .033) and the use of >1 graft (105.0° vs 121.3°, P = .040) resulted in decreased abduction.Conclusion:This was the first large series to observe patients with chronic or subacute PM tendon tears treated with dermal allograft reconstruction. PM tendon reconstruction with dermal allografts resulted in good objective and subjective patient-reported outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.