Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Retrospective interobserver agreement on diagnoses of 4th and 5th carpometacarpal fracture-dislocation and hamate fracture in plain X-ray – Is CT essential after ulnar carpometacarpal pain?

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To determine interobserver agreement and reliability of different radiological parameters in the assessment of fracture-dislocation of the 4th and 5th carpometacarpal joints (FD CMC 4–5) and associated hamate fracture on radiographs.

Materials and methods

A retrospective, consecutive case series of 53 patients diagnosed with FD CMC 4–5. Emergency room diagnostic radiology images were reviewed by four independent observers. The reviews included assessment of radiological patterns and parameters in relation to CMC fracture-dislocations and associated injuries previously described in the literature, to analyze their diagnostic power (specificity and sensitivity) and reproducibility (interobserver reliability).

Results

Among 53 patients, mean age 35.3 years, dislocation of the 5th CMC joint was present in 32/53 (60%) of patients, mostly (11/32 [34%]) associated with 4th CMC dislocation and base of 4th and 5th metacarpal fracture. The most common presentation of hamate fracture, in 4/18 (22%), was associated with combined 4th and 5th CMC dislocation and base of metacarpal fracture. Computed tomography (CT) was performed in 23 patients. Performing CT scan was significantly associated with hamate fracture diagnosis (p < 0.001). Interobserver agreement was slight (0–0.641) for most of the parameters and diagnoses. Sensitivity ranged from 0 to 0.61. Overall, the described parameters had low sensitivity.

Conclusion

Radiological parameters described for assessment of fracture-dislocation of the 4th and 5th CMC joints and associated hamate fracture have a slight interobserver agreement index in plain X-ray and low sensitivity for diagnostic assessment. These results suggest the need for emergency medicine diagnostic protocols that include CT scan for such injuries.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT04668794

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cano Gala C, Pescador Hernández D, RendónDíaz DA, LópezOlmedo J, Blanco BJ. Fracture of the body of hamate associated with a fracture of the base of fourth metacarpal: A case report and review of literature of the last 20 years. Int J Surg Case Rep Elsevier. 2013;4:442–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. SarabiaCondés JM, IbañezMartínez L, Sánchez Carrasco MA, Carrillo Julia FJ, SalmerónMartínez EL. Fracturas del ganchoso. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol Ediciones Doyma, SL. 2015;59:299–306.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Milch H. Fracture of the hamate bone [Internet]. Jbjs. 1934 [cited 2021 Dec 24]. p. 459–62.

  4. Cain JE, Shepler TR, Wilson MR. Hamatometacarpal fracture-dislocation: Classification and treatment. J Hand Surg Am J Hand Surg Am. 1987;12:762–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ebraheim NA, Skie MC, Savolaine ER, Jackson WT. Coronal fracture of the body of the hamate. J Trauma - Inj Infect Crit Care Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. 1995;38:169–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Garcia-Elias M, Rossignani P, Cots M. Combined fracture of the hook of the hamate and palmar dislocation of the fifth carpometacarpal joint. J Hand Surg Eur Vol SAGE Publications Ltd. 1996;21:446–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Henderson JJ, Arafa MAM. Carpometacarpal dislocation An easily missed diagnosis. J Bone Jt Surg - Ser B. 1987;69:212–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Eder C, Scheller A, Schwab N, Krapohl BD. Hamate’s coronal fracture diagnostic and therapeutic approaches based on a long-term follow-up. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW German Medical Science. 2019;8:Doc05.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cobb WA, Dingle L, Zarb Adami R, Rodrigues J. Management of fracture-dislocations of the little finger carpometacarpal joint: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Eur Vol [Internet]. SAGE Publications Ltd; 2018 [cited 2020 May 5];43:530–8

  10. Spencer J, Hunt SL, Zhang C, Walter C, Everist B. Radiographic signs of hook of hamate fracture: evaluation of diagnostic utility. Skeletal Radiol Springer Verlag. 2019;48:1891–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Davis DL. Hook of the hamate: The spectrum of often missed pathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol Am Roentgen Ray Soc. 2017;209:1110–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Roche S, Lenehan B, Street J, O’Sullivan M. Fourth metacarpal base fracture in association with coronal hamate fracture. Inj Extra. 2005;36:316–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Welling RD, Jacobson JA, Jamadar DA, Chong S, Caoili EM, Jebson PJL. MDCT and radiography of wrist fractures: Radiographic sensitivity and fracture patterns. Am J Roentgenol AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:10–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fisher MR, Rogers LF, Hendrix RW. Systematic approach to identifying fourth and fifth carpometacarpal joint dislocations. Am J Roentgenol American Roentgen Ray Society. 1983;140:319–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hirano K, Inoue G. Classification and treatment of hamate fractures. Hand Surg Hand Surg. 2005;10:151–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Landis JR, Koch GG. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data Biometrics. JSTOR. 1977;33:159.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Parikh R, Mathai A, Parikh S, Sekhar GC, Thomas R. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Indian J Ophthalmol Medknow Publ Media Pvt Ltd. 2008;56:45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Münn F, Laun RA, Asmus A, Bülow R, Bakir S, Haralambiev L, et al. Detection of fractures of hand and forearm in whole-body CT for suspected polytrauma in intubated patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. BioMed Central Ltd.; 2020;21

  19. Kramer SB, Selles CA, Bakker D, Schep NWL. Comparison of extra-articular radiographic parameters of distal radius fractures on plain radiographs and CT scans. J Hand Surg Eur Vol SAGE Publications Ltd. 2022;47:142–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jakubietz MG, Mages L, Zahn RK, Kenn W, Jakubietz RG, Meffert RH. The role of CT scan in postoperative evaluation of distal radius fractures: Retrospective analysis in regard to complications and revision rates. J Orthop Sci Elsevier. 2017;22:434–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Etli I, Kozaci N, Avci M, Karakoyun OF. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of X-ray and computed tomography in patients with wrist injury. Injury Elsevier Ltd. 2020;51:651–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim JK, Shin SJ. A novel hamatometacarpal fracture-dislocation classification system based on CT scan. Injury Injury. 2012;43:1112–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Eder C, Scheller A, Schwab N, Krapohl BD. Hamate’s coronal fracture: diagnostic and therapeutic approaches based on a long-term follow-up. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW [Internet]. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW; 2019 [cited 2023 May 5];8:Doc05. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30984513

  24. Addala TE, Greffier J, Hamard A, Snene F, Bobbia X, Bastide S, et al. Early results of ultra-low-dose CT-scan for extremity traumas in emergency room. Quant Imaging Med Surg AME Publishing Company. 2022;12:4248–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Falkowski AL, Kovacs BK, Schwartz FR, Benz RM, Stieltjes B, Hirschmann A. Comparison of 3D X-ray tomography with computed tomography in patients with distal extremity fractures Skeletal Radiol. Springer Sci Business Media Deutschland GmbH. 2020;49:1965–75.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hand Unit and Upper Extremity, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital de La Santa Creu I Sant Pau. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    M. Fa-Binefa, M. Almenara, J. M. Mata-Muñoz & C. Lamas

  2. Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain

    M. Fa-Binefa, M. Almenara, J. M. Mata-Muñoz, I. Gich-Saladich, J. Llauger & C. Lamas

  3. CIBER of Epidemiology (CIBERESP). Clinical Epidemiology Department, Hospital de La Santa Creu I Sant Pau, 08025, Barcelona, Spain

    I. Gich-Saladich

  4. Radiology Department. Hospital de La Santa Creu I Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08025, Barcelona, Spain

    J. Llauger

Authors
  1. M. Fa-Binefa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Almenara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. M. Mata-Muñoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. Gich-Saladich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Llauger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. Lamas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Lamas.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Ethical institutional board committee approved this study: IIBSP-FLC-2020–29. Approval was obtained and in keeping with the policies for a retrospective review, informed consent was not required.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fa-Binefa, M., Almenara, M., Mata-Muñoz, J.M. et al. Retrospective interobserver agreement on diagnoses of 4th and 5th carpometacarpal fracture-dislocation and hamate fracture in plain X-ray – Is CT essential after ulnar carpometacarpal pain?. Skeletal Radiol 52, 2427–2433 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04366-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-023-04366-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation