Posterior Protrusion Measures (PPM) for Three-Dimensional (3D) CT Classification of Pertrochanteric Fractures

Introduction We introduced a novel numerical index known as posterior protrusion measures (PPM), derived from lateral plain radiograph images, which effectively serves to distinguish stable from unstable pertrochanteric fractures. The present study aims to scrutinize PPM values among two classified fracture patterns, stable and unstable, within the three-dimensional (3D) CT classification system, establishing a numeric threshold for PPM to differentiate between these groups; explore the potential relationship between the PPM index and unclassified categories; investigate how groups divided by the PPM threshold value can predict fracture stability based on 3D CT. Materials and methods In this study, three observers were tasked with measuring PPM on a single occasion. The chi-square test assessed the association between each demographic parameter on a categorical scale and stable/unstable groups. Continuous variables were also subject to examination. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was employed to determine optimal cut-off points of PPM for predicting the presence of stable versus unstable groups. Additionally, the chi-square test examined the linear relation between separated groups based on the defined threshold PPM value and the stable/unstable groups. Results A total of 106 pertrochanteric fractures were identified using CT scan images and plain radiographs in the 3D CT classification system, revealing the stable group of 35 patients and the unstable group of 71 patients. The PPM values for stable/unstable fractures were, on average (± standard deviation), 0.34±0.25/0.50±0.29 for observer 1, 0.31±0.23/0.57±0.31 for observer 2, and 0.41±0.29/0.57±0.26 for observer 3, respectively (p<0.01). We established 0.3 as the cut-off value for PPM. The average PPM value among three observers represented each patient to assess fracture stability. The group with PPM <0.3 included 27 patients (16 stable and 11 unstable), and the group with PPM ≥0.3 group comprised 79 patients (19 stable and 60 unstable; p<0.005). Conclusion The present study revealed a significant difference in PPM values among stable and unstable 3D CT classification groups. Additionally, a threshold PPM value of 0.3 suggests a pivotal point for differentiating fracture stability. This innovative methodology makes a substantial contribution to clinical endeavors, potentially circumventing the necessity for 3D CT scanning.