A Retrospective Study on the Morphology of Posterior Malleolar Fractures Based on a CT Scan: Whether We Ignore the Importance of Fracture Height

Abstract

Objective. The aim of this study was to investigate the respective correlation between the height (H) of a posterior malleolar fracture (PMF) and the involved area (S) of an articular surface and the presence of “die-punch.” Methods. Patients with closed posterior malleolar fractures admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to December 2017 were selected, with complete X-ray and 3D reconstruction CT imaging data. The gender, age, injured side, and surgical fixation methods of the patients were recorded. A preoperative ankle CT scan was performed, and the images were viewed through the PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication Systems). Simultaneously, the involved joint surface area (S) by the posterior malleolar fracture was measured, as well as the proportion of the fracture area to the total ankle joint area. On the sagittal reconstruction CT images, the height (H) of the posterior malleolar fracture was measured to compare the correlation between the height of the fracture and the area of the fracture, as well as the area ratio. Besides, according to the presence or absence of “die-punch,” patients were divided into two groups: A and B. And each group was further divided into three subgroups according to age (16-39 years old, 40-59 years old, and ≥60 years old). The statistical differences in the height of fracture between the subgroups were compared. Results. A total of 48 patients, aged 16-82 years, with an average age of 48.9 years, were included in this study, including 13 males and 35 females. There were 20 cases of left ankle injury and 28 cases of right ankle injury. The average height of the posterior malleolar fractures was 18.19 mm, the average area of the fracture was 202.28 mm2, and the average ratio of the fracture area to the total articular surface area was 17.84%. Besides, die-punch was seen in 27 cases and not in 21 cases. The average height of fractures was 21.33±5.38 mm in group A1, 14.38±9.01 mm in group B1, 18.30±7.95 mm in group A2, 14.48±5.37 mm in group B2, 26.26±6.73 mm in group A3, and 12.77±3.07 mm in group B3. Conclusion. The height (H) of the posterior malleolar fractures is positively correlated with the fracture area (S) and the fracture area ratio (FAR). The posterior malleolar fractures with “die-punch” tend to have a greater average height than that without “die-punch.” In clinical work, orthopedic surgeons should not only pay attention to the size of the posterior malleolus fracture but also value its height, which hopefully could provide insight into the treatment and prognosis of PMF patients.