No Consequence for Lateral View X-Ray in Displaced Proximal Femoral Fractures in the Elderly

Christian Macke; Maic Werner; Lambert Herold; Olaf Krause; Tilmann Graulich; Jan-Dierk Clausen; Christian Krettek; Emmanouil Liodakis

doi:10.3389/fsurg.2021.652528

No Consequence for Lateral View X-Ray in Displaced Proximal Femoral Fractures in the Elderly

Front Surg. 2021 May 24:8:652528. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.652528. eCollection 2021.

Authors

Christian Macke¹, Maic Werner¹, Lambert Herold¹, Olaf Krause², Tilmann Graulich¹, Jan-Dierk Clausen¹, Christian Krettek¹, Emmanouil Liodakis¹

Affiliations

¹ Trauma Department, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
² Institute for General Medicine, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.

Abstract

Background: Due to demographic changes, proximal femoral fractures (PFF) in the elderly rise constantly. The standard diagnostic tool is still the X-ray of the pelvis/hip in two planes. Our hypothesis was that the lateral-view X-ray has little influence on classification, planning of the operative procedure, and choice of implant in geriatric patients. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all initial X-rays of PFF in geriatric patients (≥70 years) from May 2018 until August 2019 in a Level I Trauma center. Three experienced consultants categorized the fractures on the ap pelvis view and performed Garden and Pauwels classification as well as a two-staged classification displaced/nondisplaced [for femoral neck fractures (FNF)] or AO Classification [for intertrochanteric fractures (ITF)]. Afterward, they decided the operative strategy as well as implant choice [dynamic hip screw (DHS), intramedullary nail (IMN), or arthroplasty]. After 4 weeks, they categorized all fractures again with now available lateral view X-rays in a different order. Results: Two hundred seven patients (146 female, 61 male; 70.5 vs. 29.5%) with 90 FNF and 117 ITF (43.5 vs. 56.5%) could be included. Age was 84.6 ± 6.9 years. The treatment was in 45 cases DHS, in 82 cases IMN, and for the other 80 cases arthroplasty. The interobserver reliability of the classifications were poor, except for the two-staged classification [Fleiss-κ ap view only = 0.708 (CI 95% 0.604, 0.812) vs. additional lateral = 0.756 (CI 95% 0.644, 0.869)]. Moreover, independent from the classification, there were no significant changes in management and choice of implant with additional lateral view. Conclusions: Regarding our results, we consider the lateral view dispensable for standard X-ray of displaced PFF in geriatric patients. In nondisplaced fractures, it could be added secondary.

Keywords: DHS; X-ray; elderly; lateral view; operative treatment; proximal femoral fracture; proximal femoral nail.