• Shozo Kanezaki, Masashi Miyazaki, Tomonori Sakamoto, Akihiro Hino, Tetsutaro Abe, Noriaki Sako, and Hiroshi Tsumura.
• Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Oita University, Oita, Japan.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2023 Oct 20; 102 (42): e35523e35523.

AbstractWe aimed to describe variations of dome impaction fractures and their characteristics using a new classification system, to explore the relationship between dome impaction and the gull sign. The present study was a retrospective descriptive study. All 104 cases of acetabular fracture that were treated in our institution from 2013 to 2022 were enrolled. Of these, 22 had dome impaction fractures. The primary outcome variable was to describe the variations and characteristics of dome impaction fractures. They were classified into 3 major subgroups based on reconstructed axial, coronal, and sagittal computed tomography findings: anteromedial, superomedial (SM), and posteromedial. The secondary outcome variable was to explore the relationship between dome impaction on computed tomography findings and the gull sign on plain radiographs. There were 4 cases of anteromedial (18.2%), 13 of SM (59.1%), and 5 of posteromedial (22.7%). There were 15 cases (68.2%) with the gull sign and 7 cases (31.8%) without the gull sign on plain radiographs. Twelve of fifteen cases (80.0%) with the gull sign had dome impaction fractures of the SM type. We found a variety of patterns of dome impaction fracture. Surgeons should be aware of atypical dome impactions not showing the gull sign.Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

14 keywords...

hide…