Email this article Actual features of express diagnostic of acetabular fractures. Part II. Complex fractures diagnostic algorithm
- Authors: Stoyukhin S.S.1, Lazarev A.F.2, Gudushauri Y.G.2
-
Affiliations:
- “City clinical hospital No. 15. O.M. Filatov” Department of health of Moscow
- National medical researchcenter for traumatology and orthopedics N.N. Priorova Ministry of Health of Russia
- Issue: Vol 26, No 4 (2019)
- Pages: 46-54
- Section: Reviews
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/0869-8678/article/view/47220
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/vto201904146
- ID: 47220
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Authors shows rational algorithm of choosing fracture type according to Judet—Letournel classification. Case presentation is based on complex («associated») fracture types.
Keywords
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
S. S. Stoyukhin
“City clinical hospital No. 15. O.M. Filatov” Department of health of Moscow
Author for correspondence.
Email: sergey.stoyukhin@gmail.com
PHd, MD, traumatologist-orthopedist
Russian Federation, MoscowA. F. Lazarev
National medical researchcenter for traumatology and orthopedics N.N. Priorova Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: sergey.stoyukhin@gmail.com
doctor of medical Sciences, Professor
Russian Federation, MoscowYu. G. Gudushauri
National medical researchcenter for traumatology and orthopedics N.N. Priorova Ministry of Health of Russia
Email: sergey.stoyukhin@gmail.com
doctor of medical Sciences, Md
Russian Federation, MoscowReferences
- Judet R., Judet J., Letournel E. Fractures of the acetabulum: Classification and surgical approaches for open reduction. J Bone Joint Surg. 1964;8(46A):1615-75.
- Patel V., Day A., Dinah F. et al. The value of specific radiological features in the classification of acetabular fractures. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007;89:72-6.
- Durkee N.J., Jacobson J., Jamadar D. et al. Classification of common acetabular fractures: radiographic and CT appearances. AJR. 2006;187:915-25.
- Beaule P.E. Letournel classification for acetabular fractures assessment of interobserver and intraobserver reliability. J Bone Joint Surg. 2003;7(85-A):1704-9.
Supplementary files
Supplementary Files
Action
1.
JATS XML
2.
Fig. 1. Patient №1. а — overview X-rays of the patient’s pelvis at admission; б — the first stage of fracture detection; в — the second stage of fracture detection; г — final diagnosis of the fracture of the posterior column associated with the back wall. Verification of the fracture of the posterior column associated with the fracture of the back wall with sighting X-rays: д — in the iliac and e — obturator projection.
Download (1MB)
3.
Fig. 2. Patient №2. а — observational X-rays of the pelvis at admission; б — the first stage of fracture detection; в — the second stage of fracture diagnosis; г — transverse fracture associated with the back wall detection; d, e — verification of the transverse fracture associated with the back wall with sighting X-rays.
Download (2MB)
4.
Fig. 3. Patient №3. а — observational X-rays of the pelvis at admission; б — the first stage of fracture detection; в — final definition of a T-shaped fracture; г, д— verification of T-shaped fracture with sighting X-rays.
Download (1MB)
5.
Fig. 4. Patient №4. а — observational X-rays of the pelvis at admission; б — the first stage of fracture detection; в — the second stage of fracture diagnosis; г — verification of a two-column fracture (arrows indicate a symptom of spurs); д — X-ray in the iliac projection at a two-column fracture.
Download (2MB)
6.
Fig. 5. Patient №5. а — observational X-rays of the pelvis at admission; б — the first stage of fracture diagnosis; в — the second stage of fracture detection; г — final diagnosis of the anterior column fracture associated with the posterior half-cross fracture; д — X-ray in the iliac projection when the anterior column is fractured, associated with posterior semi-cross fracture.
Download (196KB)
7.
Fig. 1.1
Download (17KB)
8.
Fig. 1.2
Download (18KB)
9.
Fig. 1.3
Download (18KB)
10.
Fig. 1.4
Download (16KB)
11.
Fig. 1.5
Download (15KB)
12.
Fig. 2.1
Download (25KB)
13.
Fig. 2.2
Download (30KB)
14.
Fig. 2.3
Download (35KB)
15.
Fig. 2.4
Download (28KB)
16.
Fig. 2.5
Download (32KB)
