ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Given the rare nature of tibial tubercle fractures, previous studies are mostly limited to small, single-center series. This results in practice variation. Previous research has shown poor surgeon agreement on utilization of advanced imaging, but improved evidence-based indications may help balance clinical utility with resource utilization. The purpose of this study is to quantify diagnostic practices for tibial tubercle fractures in a large, multicenter cohort, with attention to the usage and impact of advanced imaging. METHODS: This is a retrospective series of pediatric tibial tubercle fractures from 7 centers between 2007 and 2022. Exclusion criteria were age above 18 years, missing demographic and pretreatment data, closed proximal tibial physis and tubercle apophysis, or a proximal tibia fracture not involving the tubercle. Demographic and injury data were collected. Fracture classifications were derived from radiographic evaluation. The utilization of advanced imaging was recorded as well as the presence of findings not identified on radiographs. Standard descriptive statistics were reported, and χ2 tests were performed (means reported±SD). RESULTS: A total of 598 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria, of which 88.6% (530/598) were male with a mean age of 13.8±1.9 years. Internal oblique x-rays were obtained in 267 patients (44.6%), computed tomography (CT) in 158 (26.4%), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 64 (10.7%). There were significant differences in the frequency at which CT (7.2% to 79.4%, P<0.001) and MRI were obtained (1.5% to 54.8%, P<0.001). CT was obtained most frequently for Ogden type IV fractures (50/99, 50.5%), and resulted in novel findings that were not visualized on radiographs in a total of 37/158 patients (23.4%). The most common finding on CT was intra-articular fracture extension (25/37). MRI was obtained most frequently for Ogden type V fractures (13/35, 37.1%), and resulted in novel findings in a total of 31/64 patients (48.4%). The most common finding was patellar tendon injury (11/64), but only 3 of these patients required tendon repair. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation exists in the diagnostic evaluation of tibial tubercle fractures. CT was most helpful in clarifying intra-articular involvement, while MRI can identify patellar tendon injury, periosteal sleeve avulsion, or a nondisplaced fracture. This study quantifies variation in diagnostic practices for tibial tubercle fractures, highlighting the need for evidence-based indications for advanced imaging. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
