Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(03): 502-510
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1729577
Artigo Original

Evaluation of the Reproducibility of the Schatzker Classification Reviewed by Kfuri for Tibial Plateau Fractures

Article in several languages: português | English
Henrique Mansur 
1   Serviço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Santa Helena, DF, Brasil
,
Victor Luiz Bastos Corrêa 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Forças Armadas, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Bruno Abdo 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Forças Armadas, Brasília, DF, Brasil
,
Lucas Sacramento Ramos 
3   Serviço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital Regional de Planaltina, Planaltina, DF, Brasil
,
Marcello Teixeira Castiglia 
4   Serviço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital São Lucas, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The Schatzker classification is the most used for tibial plateau fractures. Kfuri et al.[12] reviewed Schatzker's initial classification describing in more detail the involvement of the tibial plateau in the coronal plane, allowing a better understanding of the fracture pattern and a more accurate surgical planning. The objectives of the present study are to evaluate the interobserver agreement of these classifications and to evaluate the influence of the experience of the observer on the reproducibility of the instruments.

Methods An observational and retrospective study was conducted by evaluating the radiological study of 20 adult individuals with tibial plateau fractures, including radiographs and computed tomography (CT). The fractures were classified once by 34 examiners with varied experience (24 specialists and 10 residents in Orthopedics and Traumatology), according to the Schatzker classification and to the modification proposed by Kfuri. The Fleiss Kappa index was used to verify interobserver agreement.

Results The interobserver agreement index was considered moderate for the Schatzker classification (κ = 0.46) and mild for the Kfuri modification (κ = 0.30). The Schatzker classification showed moderate agreement, with κ = 0.52 for residents and κ = 0.45 among specialists. The Kfuri classification showed mild agreement, with Kappa values for residents and specialists of 0.39 and 0.28, respectively.

Conclusion The Schatzker classification and the classification modified by Kfuri presented moderate and mild interobserver agreement, respectively. In addition, the residents presented higher agreement than the specialists for the two systems studied.

Keywords

knee joint - classification - tibial fractures - reproducibility of results - knee injuries

Authors' Declaration of Contribution

Each author contributed individually and significantly to the development of the present article. Mansur H. (0000–0001–7527–969X): data collection, data analysis, writing and revision of the article, all intellectual concept of the article, preparation of the entire research project; VLBC (0000–0003–3236–4813): data collection, article writing and article review; Abdo B. (0000–0001–5269–9106): data collection, data analysis; Ramos L. S. (0000–0002–7233–796X): writing and revision of the article; Castiglia M. T. (0000–0001–7543–2199): article review.


Financial Support

There was no financial support from public, commercial, or non-profit sources.




Publication History

Received: 03 September 2020

Accepted: 03 November 2020

Article published online:
13 August 2021

© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Jacofsky DJ, Haidukerwych GJ. Tibia plateau fractures. In: Scott WN. Insall & Scott Surgery of the knee. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2006: 1133-1146
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Watson JT, Schatzker J. Tibial plateau fractures. In: Browner BD, Jupiter JB, Levine AM, Trafton PG. editors. Skeletal trauma. Basic science, management, and reconstruction. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2003: 2074-2130
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Thomas Ch, Athanasiov A, Wullschleger M, Schuetz M. Current concepts in tibial plateau fractures. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2009; 76 (05) 363-373
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tscherne H, Lobenhoffer P. Tibial plateau fractures. Management and expected results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993; (292) 87-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Junior MK, Fogagnolo F, Bitar RC, Freitas RL, Salim R, Paccola CJA. Fraturas do planalto tibial. Rev Bras Ortop 2009; 44 (06) 468-474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Millar SC, Arnold JB, Thewlis D, Fraysse F, Solomon LB. A systematic literature review of tibial plateau fractures: What classifications are used and how reliable and useful are they?. Injury 2018; 49 (03) 473-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Pires e Albuquerque R, Giordano V, Pallottino A. et al. Análise da reprodutibilidade das classificações das fraturas do platô tibial. Rev Bras Ortop 2009; 44 (03) 225-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Maripuri SN, Rao P, Manoj-Thomas A, Mohanty K. The classification systems for tibial plateau fractures: how reliable are they?. Injury 2008; 39 (10) 1216-1221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Charalambous CP, Tryfonidis M, Alvi F. et al. Inter- and intra-observer variation of the Schatzker and AO/OTA classifications of tibial plateau fractures and a proposal of a new classification system. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2007; 89 (04) 400-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mandarino M, Pessoa A, Guimarães JAM. Avaliação da reprodutibilidade da classificação de Schatzker para as fraturas do planalto tibial. Rev Into 2004; 2 (02) 11-18
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Schatzker J. Compression in the surgical treatment of fractures of the tibia. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1974; (105) 220-239
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kfuri M, Schatzker J. Revisiting the Schatzker classification of tibial plateau fractures. Injury 2018; 49 (12) 2252-2263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Walton NP, Harish S, Roberts C, Blundell C. AO or Schatzker? How reliable is classification of tibial plateau fractures?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2003; 123 (08) 396-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Mellema JJ, Doornberg JN, Molenaars RJ, Ring D, Kloen P. Traumaplatform Study Collaborative & Science of Variation Group. Interobserver reliability of the Schatzker and Luo classification systems for tibial plateau fractures. Injury 2016; 47 (04) 944-949
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Castiglia MT, Nogueira-Barbosa MH, Messias AMV. et al. The Impact of Computed Tomography on Decision Making in Tibial Plateau Fractures. J Knee Surg 2018; 31 (10) 1007-1014
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971; 76 (05) 378-382
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005; 37 (05) 360-363
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Utino AY, de Alencar DR, Fernadez Maringolo L, Negrão JM, Blumetti FC, Dobashi ET. Intra and interobserver concordance of the AO classification system for fractures of the long bones in the pediatric population. Rev Bras Ortop 2015; 50 (05) 501-508
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33 (01) 159-174
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Ramos LS, Gonçalves HM, Freitas A, Oliveira MP, Lima DMS, Carmargo WS. Avaliação da reprodutibilidade das classificações Lauge-Hansen, Danis-Weber e AO para fraturas do tornozelo. . [Publicado on-line: 2020-12-18] Rev Bras Ortop. Disponível em https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0040-1718508
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Taşkesen A, Demirkale İ, Okkaoğlu MC, Özdemir M, Bilgili MG, Altay M. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability assessment of tibial plateau fracture classification systems. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 2017; 28 (03) 177-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zhu Y, Hu CF, Yang G, Cheng D, Luo CF. Inter-observer reliability assessment of the Schatzker, AO/OTA and three-column classification of tibial plateau fractures. J Trauma Manag Outcomes 2013; 7 (01) 7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gicquel T, Najihi N, Vendeuvre T, Teyssedou S, Gayet LE, Huten D. Tibial plateau fractures: reproducibility of three classifications (Schatzker, AO, Duparc) and a revised Duparc classification. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2013; 99 (07) 805-816
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 de Lima Lopes C, da Rocha Cândido Filho CA, de Lima E Silva TA, Gonçalves MC, de Oliveira RL, de Lima PR. Importance of radiological studies by means of computed tomography for managing fractures of the tibial plateau. Rev Bras Ortop 2014; 49 (06) 593-601
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Brunner A, Horisberger M, Ulmar B, Hoffmann A, Babst R. Classification systems for tibial plateau fractures; does computed tomography scanning improve their reliability?. Injury 2010; 41 (02) 173-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Rafii M, Lamont JG, Firooznia H. Tibial plateau fractures: CT evaluation and classification. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1987; 27 (02) 91-112
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kfuri M, Schatzker J, Castiglia MT, Giordano V, Fogagnolo F, Stannard JP. Extended Anterolateral Approach for Complex Lateral Tibial Plateau Fractures. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (03) 204-211
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar