The Development of a Universally Accepted Sacral Fracture Classification: A Survey of AOSpine and AOTrauma Members.

Authors

Gregory D. Schroeder, Thomas Jefferson UniversityFollow
Mark Kurd, Thomas Jefferson UniversityFollow
Christopher K. Kepler, Thomas Jefferson UniversityFollow
James C. Krieg, Thomas Jefferson UniversityFollow
Jefferson R. Wilson, Thomas Jefferson UniversityFollow
Conor P. Kleweno, University of WashingtonFollow
Reza Firoozabadi, University of WashingtonFollow
Carlo Bellabarba, University of WashingtonFollow
Frank Kandizoria, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Frankfurt
Klause J. Schnake, Schön Klinik Nürnberg FürthFollow
S. Rajesekaran, Ganga Hospital
Marcel F. Dvorak, University of British ColumbiaFollow
Jens R. Chapman, Swedish Neuroscience InstituteFollow
Luiz R. Vialle, Catholic University, CuritibaFollow
F. C. Oner, University Medical Center, UtrechtFollow
Alex R. Vaccaro, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital and The Rothman InstituteFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

11-1-2016

Comments

This article has been peer reviewed. It is the author’s final published version in Global Spine Journal

Volume 6, Issue 7, November 2016, Pages 686-694.

The published version is available at DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1580611. Copyright © Elsevier

Abstract

Study Design Survey study. Objective To determine the global perspective on controversial aspects of sacral fracture classifications. Methods While developing the AOSpine Sacral Injury Classification System, a survey was sent to all members of AOSpine and AOTrauma. The survey asked four yes-or-no questions to help determine the best way to handle controversial aspects of sacral fractures in future classifications. Chi-square tests were initially used to compare surgeons' answers to the four key questions of the survey, and then the data was modeled through multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 474 surgeons answered all questions in the survey. Overall 86.9% of respondents felt that the proposed hierarchical nature of injuries was appropriate, and 77.8% of respondents agreed that that the risk of neurologic injury is highest in a vertical fracture through the foramen. Almost 80% of respondents felt that the separation of injuries based on the integrity of L5-S1 facet was appropriate, and 83.8% of surgeons agreed that a nondisplaced sacral U fracture is a clinically relevant entity. Conclusion This study determines the global perspective on controversial areas in the injury patterns of sacral fractures and demonstrates that the development of a comprehensive and universally accepted sacral classification is possible.

Recommended Citation

Schroeder, Gregory D.; Kurd, Mark; Kepler, Christopher K.; Krieg, James C.; Wilson, Jefferson R.; Kleweno, Conor P.; Firoozabadi, Reza; Bellabarba, Carlo; Kandizoria, Frank; Schnake, Klause J.; Rajesekaran, S.; Dvorak, Marcel F.; Chapman, Jens R.; Vialle, Luiz R.; Oner, F. C.; and Vaccaro, Alex R., "The Development of a Universally Accepted Sacral Fracture Classification: A Survey of AOSpine and AOTrauma Members." (2016). Rothman Institute Faculty Papers. Paper 82.
https://jdc.jefferson.edu/rothman_institute/82

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.