key: cord-0721239-azgkm58v authors: Şahin, Ertuğrul title: A new radiographic classification of fifth distal metacarpal fractures date: 2021-06-30 journal: Ir J Med Sci DOI: 10.1007/s11845-021-02684-2 sha: 231737c940be9e01b07744fdfd02e158dc1d13b5 doc_id: 721239 cord_uid: azgkm58v BACKGROUND: The fifth metacarpal fractures are the most common in all of hand fractures. To our knowledge, the classification of the fifth distal metacarpal bone fractures has not been studied. AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe a new classification system based on x-ray and to evaluate its reliability and reproducibility. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 166 fifth distal metacarpal fractures were identified for classification and recorded. Two orthopedic surgeons reviewed and categorized them according to a newly designed classification. twice 1 month apart. Reliabilities of intra- and inter-observer were calculated with Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Mean values of inter and intra-observer reliability were excellent (p = 0.85) and substantial (p = 0.70), respectively. In 166 patients (163 males and 3 females), concerning the percentage of the distribution of fracture types, the most common type was Type I accounted for 81 (48.8%) followed by Type II 70 (42.2%), Type III 11 (6.6%), and Type IV 4 (2.4%). Type Ia was the most prevalent among all groups. CONCLUSION: This study represented a unique classification system for fractures of the distal part of the fifth metacarpal bone. Categorization in radiographs might provide ideas regarding the prognosis and clinical outcomes of fracture patterns. Therefore, this study could guide future investigations to determine the first-line treatment of fifth distal metacarpal fracture patterns using this classification and help form a common language among surgeons concerning their treatment options. Fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges are the most common fractures of the upper extremities [1, 2] . The classification of the fifth metacarpal bone has been based on anatomical regions (head, neck, shaft, and base) [3] . Fractures of the metacarpal head are rare and mostly seen in the index finger, and they are expected to become intra-articular. Some types of metacarpal head fractures include epiphyseal, avulsion, comminuted, and boxer fractures with articular extension [4] . In addition to head fractures, neck fractures, especially in the fourth and fifth fingers (boxer's fractures), are the most common types of metacarpal fractures, accounting for 20% of all hand fractures [1, 5, 6] . Metacarpal shaft fractures are classified into three types: transverse, oblique/ spiral, and comminuted [4] . The AO Foundation and Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification of metacarpal fractures includes three parts: head, shaft, and base. Head fractures are classified into subcapital and intraarticular fractures [7] . Classification systems are important to create a common language of evaluation and discussions, so they are necessary, especially in clinical research. They provide comparisons and provide ideas about prognosis. The most suitable classification systems must be reliable and reproducible [8] . The AO classification and anatomic classification have been widely used to identify fracture types and make decisions regarding the treatment of fractures, but some fracture types cannot be placed into one of the subgroups of these classification systems. For these reasons, we developed a classification system of fifth distal metacarpal fractures based on X-ray findings. The hypothesis of the study was that this definition would be simpler and more descriptive, would have high reliability rates and would lead to the development of new treatment guidelines. Radiographic images of fifth distal metacarpal fractures were obtained at our institution from June 2015 to June 2020. Patients were enrolled through a manual search of records from consultations and outpatient clinics. Patients under 18 years of age, with a history of previous fifth distal metacarpal fractures or with fractures involving other bones of the hand (except the fourth metacarpal), were excluded. A total of 166 fifth distal metacarpal fractures were identified for classification and recorded. Two orthopedic surgeons reviewed and categorized them according to a newly designed classification. Each radiograph was assessed twice 1 month apart. The assessment of anteroposterior and oblique views was performed on the Sectra Uniview digital imaging platform (version 21.2.11.6289, Linköping, Sweden). This study was approved by a non-interventional clinical research ethics board with protocol number 2020/13-08 on June 15, 2020. Standard anteroposterior and oblique radiographs were obtained. The distal part of the fifth metacarpal bone was divided into four subgroups with three lines on anteroposterior radiographs: Line 1: between tuberosities at the most prominent parts of the head; Line 2: at the transition zone starting to appear in both the lateral and medial cortices; and Line 3: at the isthmus of the diaphysis (Fig. 1 ). The classification of the fracture type was made on anteroposterior radiography by determining its location according to these lines. Subtypes were also categorized according to the fracture line in the oblique view. Type I was located at the distal side of line one (between two tubercles), Type II was located between lines one and two (at the junction of the head and shaft of the metacarpal bone), and Types III Table 1 . Type I fractures consist of three subtypes, as shown in Fig. 2 . Type Ia, also called boxer's fracture, consists of transverse fractures between the tubercles. Type Ib consists of fractures starting at the articular surface of the head and extending vertically to the proximal surface. Type Ic is a comminuted fracture of the metacarpal head. Type II fractures consist of three subtypes, as shown in Fig. 3 . Type IIa starts from the lateral tubercle and extends proximally through the medial cortex, but the lateral cortex is intact. Type IIb is the same as type IIa, but the lateral cortex is also broken. Type IIc consists of transverse fractures through line two. Type III consists of bicortical fractures at the isthmus of the bone (Fig. 4) . Type IV consists of Type III plus fourth metacarpal shaft fracture (Fig. 5 ). Using these criteria, each radiograph was classified separately by two investi- The intraobserver and interobserver correlations were calculated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and p values [9] . Spearman's rho (r) correlation coefficient was used to analyze correlations between intraobserver agreements. Spearman's rho (p) values less than 0.2 are slight, 0.21-0.40 are fair, 0.41-0.60 are moderate, 0.61-0.80 are substantial, and more than 0.80 are almost perfect agreements [10] . An ICC value < 0.40 indicates poor agreement, 0.40-0.59 indicates fair agreement, 0.60-0.75 indicates good agreement, and above 0.75 indicates excellent agreement [11] . All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 22.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). A value below 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. A total of 166 patients (163 males and 3 females) were included. The mean age of all patients was 30.5 ± 12 years. Of all the cases, 15.1% included the left side. The percentage of the distribution of fracture types is shown in Table 2 . Almost half of all fractures were Type I, followed by Type II (42.2%). Type Ia was the most common type in all groups and subgroups, accounting for 71 cases (42.8%), followed by Type IIa, accounting for 34 cases (20.5%). The intraobserver and interobserver correlations were positive among surgeons in both the first and second rounds ( Table 3 ). The interobserver correlation in the second round was higher than that in the first round. However, the intraobserver correlations for both rounds were close to each other. The mean values of interobserver and intraobserver reliability were excellent (p = 0.85) and substantial (p = 0.70), respectively. In this study, the interrater correlation coefficients were substantial, and the intrarater correlation was excellent. These results showed that the proposed classification of fifth distal metacarpal fractures was reliable. The usefulness of classification systems is mostly related to having good interobserver and intraobserver reliability, being reproducible, helping select the appropriate treatment, being simple, being easy to use in clinical practice and providing information about prognosis [12] [13] [14] . Orthopedic surgeons, especially those dealing with trauma, use classification systems to determine the treatment modality and prognosis. Furthermore, newly designed classifications should have high reliability rates to be widespread. The AO/OTA subdivided bones with articulations at both ends and a segment of cortical bone into three parts: proximal, shaft, and distal [15] . However, no studies have focused on the distal part of the fifth metacarpal bone. In addition, Szwebel et al. [16] observed that the OTA classification has poor reliability. Based on these findings, our study had advantages in classifying fifth metacarpal distal fractures, which has never been done before, and has high reliability rates. Despite the high prevalence of metacarpal fractures, there is still no consensus regarding the most appropriate management [17, 18] . For conservative management, studies report several different treatment options ranging from buddy taping to cast with different periods for immobilization [19] . Surgical procedures are usually preferred for patients with comminuted, open, irreducible, or intraarticular fractures, polytrauma, rotational deformity, and/or shortening of bone to obtain optimal results [20, 21] . The selection of a treatment option is still controversial because there have been no definitions of distal metacarpal fractures, which leads to some bias in clinical studies and, of course, the results. Interrater and intrarater reliability tests are preferred for radiographic classification to determine the reproducibility by assessing the same views several times. The increased correlation between researchers in the second round of evaluation made us believe that the researchers adapted to the criteria of the scoring system and learned to interpret them better, although the images were presented in a shuffled order with no definitive signs on them. There is always a possibility of inconsistency between observers during radiographic evaluations. In this study, high intraobserver correlation values showed that this system could overcome this issue. In this study, the classification system presented 4 types of fracture patterns: Type Ia, Ib, and Ic; Type IIa, IIb, and IIc; and Type III and Type IV. These patterns were distinguished according to the location of the bone and the direction of the fracture line. This study was limited to only radiographic examination and did not address the prognosis of fracture and treatment options. Therefore, additional research is needed to correlate the fracture type with treatment modalities and prognosis. Like most retrospective studies, the results might be influenced by methodologic factors that could affect the quality of the study. In conclusion, we presented a unique classification system for fractures of the distal part of the fifth metacarpal bone. Categorization in radiographs might provide ideas regarding the prognosis and clinical outcomes of fracture patterns. Therefore, this study could guide future investigations to determine the first-line treatment of fifth distal metacarpal fracture patterns using this classification and help form a common language among surgeons concerning their treatment options. The frequency and epidemiology of hand and forearm fractures in the United States Fractures of the hand. Distribution and relative incidence Fractures of fifth metacarpal Fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges Anger scale and anger types of patients with fifth metacarpal neck fractures Incidence of metacarpal fractures in U.S. soldiers stationed in South Korea AO Manual of Fracture Management-Hand and Wrist Pilon fractures: a new classification system based on CT-scan The equivalence of weighted kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability Practical statistics for medical research The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Collaboration for outcome assessment in surgical trials (COAST) musculoskeletal group (2009) evaluating agreement: conducting a reliability study Interobserver and intraobserver variations in tibial pilon fracture classification systems Radiographic classification for fractures of the fifth metatarsal base Fracture and dislocation classification compendium-2018 Reliability of a classification of fractures of the hand based on the AO comprehensive classification system Metacarpal fractures: treatment and complications Current management of metacarpalfractures Are we over treating hand fractures? current practice of single metacarpal fractures Evidence-based medicine: management of metacarpal fractures The current practice of the management of little finger metacarpal fractures-a review of the literature and results of a survey conducted among upper limb surgeons in the United Kingdom Acknowledgements I want to thank Mustafa Vezirhuyuk, MD, who evaluate the radiographics and classified them. Author contribution ES: Design of the work; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work, final approval of the version to be published. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from corresponding author (Ertugrul Sahin). The data are not publicly available due to restrictions. Ethics approval This study did not involve any human or animal participants. Therefore, ethics committee approval was not needed. This study included COVID-19 topic, and approbation of Ministry of Health of Turkey was provided. The research is based on data which is open to public. Patient informed consent was not required. The authors declare no competing interests.