SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery / 2010 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4

Classification systems and Magerlʼs classification in thoracolumbar fractures

Torakolomber kırık ve çıkıklarında sınıflama sistemleri ve Magerl sınıflaması

Burak AKESEN
Osman YARAY
Ufuk AYDINLI
Pages
373–384
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Regardless of the system used, a usefull classification system should be both reliable and valid.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:A classification of injuries is necessary in order to develop a common language for treatment indications and outcomes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Classification of thoracolumbar injuries have been widely studied over 75 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Regardless of the system used, a usefull classification system should be both reliable and valid.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

A classification of injuries is necessary in order to develop a common language for treatment indications and outcomes. Classification of thoracolumbar injuries have been widely studied over 75 years. The most popular classification is Denis 3 column classification. However it does not include all type fractures and do not guide physicians for treatment options. Also theses columns are based on assumption. In this study we discussed Magerlʼs classification in detail as it is the most comprehensive classification described to date. Regardless of the system used, a usefull classification system should be both reliable and valid.

Özet

Travmalar ile ilgili sınıflamalar, endikasyon ve sonuç ile ilgili ortak bir dil kullanılmasına yardımcı olur. Bu tip sınıflamalar, 75 yıla yakın bir süredir geniş biçimde ele alınmaktadır. En popüler ve en sıklıkla kullanılan sınıflama Denisʼin 3 kolon sınıflamasıdır. Ancak, bu çalışmanın eksik yanları olduğu, her tip kırığı içermediği ve hekimlere tedavi planı, sonuç ile ilgili yeterli bilgi vermediği savunulmuştur. Bu yazıda özellikle Magerl sınıflaması üzerinde durulmasının sebebi, bu sınıflamanın şimdiye kadar tarif edilen en kapsamlı sınıflama olmasıdır. Kullanılacak olan Torakolomber kırıkların sınıflamasının geçerliliğinin ve güvenilirliğinin gösterilmiş olması, hekimler tarfından kolayca uygulanabilmesi gereklidir

🔖

Cite This Article

AKESEN, B., YARAY, O., AYDINLI, U. (2010). Classification systems and Magerlʼs classification in thoracolumbar fractures. Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4, 373–384. https://ajindex.com/articles/271482

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Aebi M. Classification of thoracolumbar fractures and dislocations. Eur Spine J 2010; 19: S2-S7
  2. Andriacchi TP, Schultz AB. A model for the studies of mechanical interactions between the human spine and rib cage. J Biomech 1974; 7: 497–507
  3. Brorson S, Bagger J, Sylvest A, Høbjartsson A. Improved variation after training of doctors in the Neer system. A randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg 2002; 84-B: 950-954
  4. Burstein AH. Fracture classification systems: Do they work and are they useful? J Bone Joint Surg 1993; 75-A: 1743-1744
  5. Cummings RJ, Loveless EA, Campbell J, Samelson S, Mazur JM. Interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of the system of King et al for the classificaiton of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg 1998; 80-A: 1107-1111
  6. Denis F. Spinal instability as defined by the three–column spine concept in acute spinal trauma. Clin Orthop 1984; 189: 65–76
  7. Denis F. The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine 1983; 88: 17-31
  8. Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Ahmad N, Yeasting RA. Projection of thoracic pedicle and its morphometric analysis. Spine 1997; 22: 233–238
  9. Ferguson RL, Allen BL. A mechanistic classification of thoracolumbar spine fractures. Clin Orthop 1984; 189: 77-88
  10. Fessler RG, Greenwald D, Peace D. Surgical exposures of cervicothoracic and upper thoracic spine. In Benzel EC, Stillerman CB (eds). The Thoracic Spine, St. Louis, Quality Medical Publishing 1999; 197–207
  11. Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Esdaile J, Duncan CP. Classification systems in orthopaedics. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2002;10-A: 290-297
  12. Grunhagen J, Egbers HJ, Heller M, Reuter M. Comparison of spine injuries by means of CT and MRI according to the classification of Magerl. Rofo 2005; 177 (6): 828-834
  13. Holdsworth FW. Fractures, dislocations, and fracture–dislocations of spine. J Bone Joint Surg 1963; 45-B: 6–20
  14. Holdsworth FW. Review article: Fractures, dislocations, and fracture–dislocations of spine. J Bone Joint Surg 1970; 52-A:1534–1551
  15. Kelly RP, Whitesides TE Jr. Treatment of lumbodorsal fracture-dislocations. J Bone Joint Surg 1968;167-A: 705-717
  16. Keynan O, Fisher CG, Vaccaro A, Fehlings MG, Oner FC, Dietz. J, Kwon B, Rampersaud R, Bono C, France J, Dvorak M. Radiographic measurement parameters in thoracolumbar fractures: a systematic review and con sensus statement of the spine trauma study group. Spine 2006; 31(5): E156-165
  17. Lee JY,