Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of the clinical relevance of traditional and new classification systems of temporal bone fractures

  • Otology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Temporal bone fractures are traditionally classified as transverse, longitudinal or mixed. Since these categories have shown little association with clinical symptoms, new classifications have been introduced, including those related to the involvement of the petrous bone and otic capsule. We have formulated a new classification based on the involvement of four parts of the temporal bone (squama, tympanic, mastoid, and petrous) and assessed which of these classification systems is the most rational using a retrospective chart review in hospital settings (KyungHee Medical Center, Seoul, Korea and Samsung Changwon Hospital, Changwon, Korea). The association between each classification and clinical symptoms was examined by analyzing temporal bone computed tomography scans of 129 patients diagnosed as temporal bone fractures over the past 7 years. Using the traditional classification, there was a significant correlation between transverse fractures and the incidence of sensorineural hearing loss. Patients with petrous bone fractures had significantly higher incidence rates of sensorineural hearing loss, vertigo, and eardrum perforation than patients without petrous bone involvement. Involvement of the otic capsule was significantly associated with sensorineural hearing loss and the severity of hearing loss. The associations of the traditional classification and the classification according to the involvement of the otic capsule, four parts of temporal bone with clinical symptoms were not high. Petrous bone fractures were significantly associated with sensorineural hearing loss, vertigo, and eardrum perforation, suggesting that this classification may be optimally associated with clinical symptoms including hearing and the results of otological examination.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ishman SL, Friedland DR (2004) Temporal bone fractures: traditional classification and clinical relevance. Laryngoscope 114:1734–1741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rafferty MA, Mc Conn Walsh R, Walsh MA (2006) A comparison of temporal bone fracture classification systems. Clin Otolaryngol 31:287–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brodie HA, Thompson TC (1997) Management of complications from 820 temporal bone fractures. Am J Otol 18:188–197

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Jennett B, Teasdale G, Fry J et al (1980) Treatment for severe head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 43:289–295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harker LA, McCabe BF (1974) Temporal bone fracture and facial nerve injury. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 7:425–431

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kerman M, Cirak B, Dagtekin A (2002) Management of skull base fractures. Neurosurgery 12:23–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Darrouzet V, Duclos JY, Liquoro D et al (2001) Management of facial paralysis resulting from temporal bone fractures: our experience in 115 cases. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 125:77–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gordon HS, Nael MS, Ravi NS, Rebecca SC, Bernadette LK, Myles LP (2011) Do contemporary temporal bone fracture classification systems reflect concurrent intracranial and cervical spine injuries? Laryngoscope 121:929–932

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chakeres DW, Spiegel PK (1983) A systematic technique for comprehensive evaluation of the temporal bone by computed tomography. Radiology 146:97–106

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Saraiya PV, Aygun N (2009) Temporal bone fractures. Emerg Radiol 16:255–265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dahiya R, Keller JD, Litofsky NS et al (1999) Temporal bone fractures: otic capsule sparing versus otic capsule violating clinical and radiographic considerations. J Trauma 47:1079–1083

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Little SC, Kesser BW (2006) Radiographic classification of temporal bone fractures: clinical predictability using a new system. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132:1300–1304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson F, Semaan MT, Megerian CA (2008) Temporal bone fracture: evaluation and management in the modern era. Otolaryngol Clin N Am 41:597–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Park SY, Yang JW, Kim SI et al (2007) Clinical study on the reliable temporal bone fracture classification scheme. Korean J Otolaryngol 50:491–495

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seung Geun Yeo.

Additional information

H. M. Kang and M. G. Kim contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kang, H.M., Kim, M.G., Boo, S.H. et al. Comparison of the clinical relevance of traditional and new classification systems of temporal bone fractures. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 269, 1893–1899 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1849-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1849-7

Keywords

Navigation