Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2021 / Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 2

Reliability of RUST and modified RUST scores for evaluation of union in pediatric and adult femoral shaft fractures

Pages
127–133
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)

The diagnostic value of the mRUST score is more evident in adult fractures.Level of Evidence: Level II, Diagnostic Study

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to determine the reliability levels of the radiographic union scale for tibial fractures (RUST) and the modifiedversion of the system, mRUST, for femoral shaft fractures in pediatric and adult patients and to evaluate the value of the scores for totaland each cortex in the decision making on fracture union.Methods: A total of 15 orthopedic surgeons scored the radiographs of 24 pediatric and 24 adult patients with femoral shaft fractures thatwere obtained at 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16 postoperative weeks treated with elastic stable intramedullary nail in pediatric patients and locked intramedullary nail in adult patients using the RUST and mRUST scores.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Receiveroperating curves were created to evaluate the contribution of total and individual cortical scores in the decision of united or non-united.Results: Intra- and inter-rater reliabilities of mRUST (ICC: 0.92 and 0.86, respectively) were slightly higher than those of RUST (ICC: 0.81and 0.77, respectively) with perfect intra- and inter-rater reliabilities for RUST (ICC: 0.92 and 0.90, respectively) and mRUST (ICC: 0.88 and0.83, respectively) in pediatric patients and substantial intra- and inter-rater reliabilities in adult patients (ICC: 0.80 and 0.76, respectively, formRUST, and 0.76 and 0.71, respectively, for RUST).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The diagnostic value of the mRUST score is more evident in adult fractures.Level of Evidence: Level II, Diagnostic Study
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: This study aimed to determine the reliability levels of the radiographic union scale for tibial fractures (RUST) and the modifiedversion of the system, mRUST, for femoral shaft fractures in pediatric and adult patients and to evaluate the value of the scores for totaland each cortex in the decision making on fracture union.Methods: A total of 15 orthopedic surgeons scored the radiographs of 24 pediatric and 24 adult patients with femoral shaft fractures thatwere obtained at 0, 4, 8, 12, and 16 postoperative weeks treated with elastic stable intramedullary nail in pediatric patients and locked intramedullary nail in adult patients using the RUST and mRUST scores. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used in the evaluationof reliability of the RUST and mRUST scores. The Fleiss kappa (k) coefficient was used in the agreement between evaluators regardingunion decision (united or non-united). The thresholds for RUST and mRUST for radiographic union decision were determined. Receiveroperating curves were created to evaluate the contribution of total and individual cortical scores in the decision of united or non-united.Results: Intra- and inter-rater reliabilities of mRUST (ICC: 0.92 and 0.86, respectively) were slightly higher than those of RUST (ICC: 0.81and 0.77, respectively) with perfect intra- and inter-rater reliabilities for RUST (ICC: 0.92 and 0.90, respectively) and mRUST (ICC: 0.88 and0.83, respectively) in pediatric patients and substantial intra- and inter-rater reliabilities in adult patients (ICC: 0.80 and 0.76, respectively, formRUST, and 0.76 and 0.71, respectively, for RUST). At each time point, the mean mRUST and RUST scores were higher for pediatric fractures(p<0.001). The Fleiss k coefficient for union decision was perfect for pediatric fractures (0.88) and substantial for adult fractures (0.79). The totalmRUST score had a higher predictive value of union than the total RUST score (area under the curve: 0.984 vs. 0.922 in adult fractures and0.990 vs. 0.943 in pediatric fractures). A RUST score of ≥10 and mRUST score of ≥12 were excellent predictors of fracture union.Conclusion: Fracture union of simple two-part pediatric and adult femoral shaft fractures treated with intramedullary fixation can bereliably assessed using the RUST and mRUST scores. The diagnostic value of the mRUST score is more evident in adult fractures.Level of Evidence: Level II, Diagnostic Study

🔖

Cite This Article

MİSİR, A., YILDIZ, K. İ., KIZKAPAN, T. B., UZUN, E., ÖZÇAMDALLI, M., OĞUZKAYA, S. (2021). Reliability of RUST and modified RUST scores for evaluation of union in pediatric and adult femoral shaft fractures. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 2, 127–133. https://ajindex.com/articles/353413

References (15)

  1. Morshed S. Current options for determining fracture union. Adv Med 2014; 2014: 708574
  2. Corrales LA, Morshed S, Bhandari M, Miclau T 3rd. Variability in the assessment of fracture-healing in orthopaedic trauma studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90: 1862-8
  3. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Swiontkowski MF, Tornetta P 3rd, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. A lack of consensus in the assessment of fracture healing among orthopaedic surgeons. J Orthop Trauma. 2002; 16: 562-6
  4. Litrenta J, Tornetta P 3rd, Mehta S, et al. Determination of radiographic healing: An assessment of consistency using RUST and modified RUST in Metadiaphyseal fractures. J Orthop Trauma 2015; 29: 516-20
  5. Dijkman BG, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH, Bhandari M. When is a fracture healed? Radiographic and clinical criteria revisited. J Orthop Trauma 2010; 24(Suppl 1): S76-80
  6. Whelan DB, Bhandari M, Stephen D, et al. Development of the radiographic union score for tibial fractures for the assessment of tibial fracture healing after intramedullary fixation. J Trauma 2010; 68: 629-32
  7. Kooistra BW, Dijkman BG, Busse JW, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH, Bhandari M. The radiographic union scale in tibial fractures: reliability and validity. J Orthop Trauma 2010; 24: S81-S6
  8. Leow JM, Clement ND, Tawonsawatruk T, Simpson CJ, Simpson AHRW. The radiographic union scale in tibial (RUST) fractures: Reliability of the outcome measure at an independent centre. Bone Joint Res 2016; 5: 116-21
  9. DiSilvio F Jr, Foyil S, Schiffman B, Bernstein M, Summers H, Lack WD. Long bone union accurately predicted by cortical bridging within 4 months. J Bone Joint Surg Am Open Access 2018; 3: e0012
  10. Islam O, Soboleski D, Symons S, Davidson LK, Ashworth MA, Babyn P. Development and duration of radiographic signs of bone healing in children. Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175: 75-8
  11. Lindaman LM. Bone healing in children. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 2001; 18: 97-108
  12. Schell H, Duda GN, Peters A, Tsitsilonis S, Johnson KA, Schmidt-Bleek K. The haematoma and its role in bone healing. J Exp Orthop 2017; 4: 5
  13. Perlepe V, Cerato A, Putineanu D, et al. Value of a radiographic score for the assessment of healing of nailed femoral and tibial shaft fractures: A retrospective preliminary study. Eur J Radiol 2018; 98: 36-40
  14. Debuka E, Kushwaha NS, Kumar D, Singh A, Sharma V. Rust score-An adequate rehabilitation guide for diaphyseal femur fractures managed by TENS. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2019; 10: 922-7
  15. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measu