The position of the fracture and the position of the component fragments are the most important elements that will determine the management of a fracture.
Position of the Fracture Line
In long bones fractures may occur in the shaft (diaphysis), the neck (metaphysis), the growth plate itself (epiphyseal plate), the epiphysis but often affects two or more of these sites.
Diaphyseal fractures are described as being in the proximal, mid or distal shaft. Since compact bone is mostly involved in diaphyseal fractures, healing is slower.
The metaphysis is relatively short and therefore fractures often involve the diaphysis and or the epiphysis. Since the metaphysis is mostly made up from cancellous bone healing is more rapid in this region.
Epiphyseal plate fractures occur in immature individuals when the growth plate is still active. Thus fractures in this region may be complicated by aberrant and therefore discrepant growth of the affected side.
Salter Harris Classification
Type I – Epiphyseal separation: there is displacement of the epiphysis from the metaphysis at the growth plate. This fracture is most common in newborns and infants and the prognosis is excellent.
Type II – A small corner of metaphyseal bone fractures and displaces, with the epiphysis displaced from the metaphysis at the growth plate. This is the most common fracture and carries an excellent prognosis as well.
Type III-Fracture is through the epiphysis and part of the growth plate, but the metaphysis is unaffected. This is an uncommon fracture and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is usually necessary.
Type IV-Fracture is through the epiphysis, growth plate, and metaphysis. Several fracture lines may be seen. The prognosis is poor since blood supply is stripped and requires perfect reduction.
Type V-Impaction of the epiphyseal plate occurs, with the metaphysis driven into the epiphysis. This is a rare fracture and carries a poor prognosis. The early X-ray may be negative.
With each progressive type, the fracture described becomes increasingly difficult to treat and carries a poorer prognosis for return to normal function.
Epiphyseal fractures in adults may be isolated or may involve the joint. Fractures involving the joint infer injury to the articulating cartilage. These fractures require perfect alignment for healing to take place so that joint function can return with prevention of degenerative arthritis. Hence it is usual for the fracture involving joint surfaces to require orthopedic attention and unless perfect closed reduction can be attained and maintained, open reduction is required.
Position of the Component Parts of the Fracture
Displacement of the fracture fragments may lead to abnormal alignment. There are three major aspects that encompass displacement including length discrepancy, angulation, and rotation.
Alignment
Alignment of the component fracture fragments is a key component in the evaluation of fractures. Alignment describes the relationship of the longitudinal axis of one fragment to another.
When a fracture has anatomical alignment it means that almost 100% of the surface of the two components of the fracture are appropriately aligned in the longitudinal axis. Anatomical alignment means that continuity of the fragments is maintained. Since the fracture needs bone on bone contact for optimal reparative process it is most important that optimal contact is achieved.
Partial continuity implies that there is some contact between the components.
Fractures that have some continuity of osseous fragments may, in general, be treated by closed reduction, while fractures that have lost continuity usually require open reduction.
Displacement
Displacement is the term used to describe the malalignment of two fracture fragments where there is loss of cortical continuity. There are many adjectives used to describe the displacement, since the fracture fragments can be displaced anteriorly posteriorly medially, laterally, superiorly inferiorly or any combination of these. Displacement is the amount of translation of the distal fragment in relation to the proximal fragment in either the anterior/posterior or the medial/lateral planes. Displacement is the opposite of apposition.
There are three major aspects that encompass displacement including length discrepancy, angulation, and rotation.
This diagnosis of displacement requires two views on an X -ray since a foreshortened appearance may for example also be due to the one component being pushed down and posterior and the other being pushed up and anteriorly.
Displacement – Length Discrepancy
Length discrepancy occurs when the two major fragments become overlapped or distracted.
Overlap occurs as a result of the downward movement of the one component and or the upward movement of the second fragment. This is also called apposition (or bayonet apposition) which infers fragment overlap. As a result there is shortening of the bone.
Impaction fractures occur when one component of a fracture is driven into, or telescoped into the second part causing foreshortening of the bone.
Distraction infers the longitudinal separation of the fragments, and overall lengthening of the bone.
Displacement – Angulation
Angulation infers an angular relationship of the longitudinal axis of the fracture fragments, and usually describes the distal fragment. Angulation may be due to medial lateral anterior or posterior displacement of the distal fragment. Angulation has been discussed in detail in the section on the shape of fractures.
Certain alternate terms have been used that are synonyms sometimes specifically related to the part of the body being described and sometimes as a matter of preference. Anterior and posterior are sometimes described as ventral, and dorsal, palmar when in reference to the hand, plantar when in reference to the foot, volar, varus and valgus angulation as a matter of preference.
Some of these terms we have already used such as impaction fractures
The terms varus and valgus are very similar and a variety of mnemonics have been used to try and remember which one is which. The best mnemonic relates to the story of a Russian woman walking down the street when a loose pig runs between her legs. As it does so, she looks down opens her legs and shouts “Varus the pig?” This scene is so comical and unforgettable that it has stuck in my mind for 30 years and I have never forgotten the difference between the two types of angulation. An image relating to this scene has been depicted in the section on shapes of fractures.
This diagnosis of displacement requires two views on an X -ray since a foreshortened appearance may for example also be due to the one component being pushed down and posterior and the other being pushed up and anteriorly.
The Relevance of the Position of Fractures in Other Bones
The position of the fracture line or the position of the fragments has relevance in the other types of bones as well. For example the position of the fracture line in a scaphoid injury has relevance to involvement of its blood supply such that a fracture involving the medial third has the highest risk of avascular necrosis (AVN up to 30%). Fractures in the middle third are the most common site for scaphoid fracture but are less commonly complicated by AVN, while distal third fractures are rarely complicated by AVN.
Fractures of the vertebral bodies may result in retropulsion of the fragments into the spinal cord with potentially devastating functional results as quadriplegia and even death.
The position of the fracture line and the fracture fragments in relation to each other is the most important determinant of how fractures should be managed. When the fracture in the pediatric population involves the growth plate, the potential for growth disturbances becomes a concern particularly in the Salter Harris type III,IV, and V. When a fracture involves the joint surface special attention to optimal alignment is even more important because of the involvement of the joint cartilage and failure to align exactly can be complicated by degenerative disease in later life.
When there is near anatomical alignment of the fracture fragments, with bone on bone contact, and this can be maintained for the duration of healing, then there is no need for reduction. If there is displacement, angulation distraction, shortening or rotation reduction is necessary. If this cannot be attained by a closed method, then open reduction and internal fixation is required (ORIF).