Abstract
Background
The distal tibia is a common location for the classic metaphyseal lesion (CML). Prior radiologic-pathologic studies have suggested a tendency for medial, as opposed to lateral, cortical injury with the CML, but there has been no formal study of the geographic distribution of this strong indicator of abuse.
Objective
This study compares medial versus lateral cortical involvement of distal tibial CMLs in a clinical cohort of infants with suspected abuse.
Materials and methods
Reports of 1,020 skeletal surveys performed for suspected abuse (July 2005-June 2016) were reviewed. Twenty-six distal tibial CMLs (14 unilateral, 6 bilateral) with anteroposterior (AP) and lateral projections on the initial skeletal survey and at least an AP view on the follow-up survey were identified in 20 infants. Two blinded pediatric radiologists determined if the medial and/or lateral margins of the distal tibial metaphysis were involved by the CML.
Results
Average interreader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.69-0.90 and 0.45-0.72, respectively. Average intrareader absolute agreement and kappa scores were 0.65-0.88 and 0.44-0.57, respectively. Analyses showed that the distal tibial CML almost always involved the medial cortical margin (reader 1=89%, reader 2=88%, pooled=89%) and the fracture infrequently involved the lateral cortical margin (reader 1=12%, reader 2=38%, pooled=26%). The percentage point difference between fracture involvement in medial and lateral margins was statistically significant from zero (P<0.001).
Conclusion
The distal tibial CML is most often encountered medially; lateral involvement is uncommon. This observation should help guide the radiologic diagnosis and could have implications for understanding the biomechanics of this distinctive injury.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kleinman PK, Perez-Rossello JM, Newton AW et al (2011) Prevalence of the classic metaphyseal lesion in infants at low versus high risk for abuse. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:1005–1008
Strouse PJ, Boal DKB (2013) Child abuse. In: Coley BD (ed) Caffey’s pediatric diagnostic imaging. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 1587–1598
Flaherty EG, Perez-Rossello JM, Levine MA et al (2014) American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on child abuse and neglect; section on radiology, American Academy of Pediatrics; section on endocrinology, American Academy of Pediatrics; section on Orthopaedics, American Academy of Pediatrics; Society of Pediatric Radiology. Evaluating children with fractures for child physical abuse. Pediatrics 133:e477–e489
Servaes S, Brown SD, Choudhary AK et al (2016) The etiology and significance of fractures in infants and young children: a critical multidisciplinary review. Pediatr Radiol 46:591–600
Silverman F (1953) The roentgen manifestations of unrecognized skeletal trauma in infants. AJR Am J Roentgenol 69:413–427
Caffey J (1957) Some traumatic lesions in growing bones other than fractures and dislocations: clinical and radiological features. Br J Radiol 30:225–238
Kleinman PK, Marks SC, Richmond J et al (1995) Inflicted skeletal injury: a postmortem radiologic-histopathologic study in 31 infants. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165:647–650
Kleinman PK, Marks SC (1996) A regional approach to classic metaphyseal lesions in abused infants: the distal tibia. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166:1207–1212
Barber I, Perez-Rossello JM, Wilson CR et al (2015) The yield of high-detail radiographic skeletal surveys in suspected infant abuse. Pediatr Radiol 45:69–80
Kleinman PK, Marks SC, Blackbourne B (1986) The metaphyseal lesion in abused infants: a radiologic histopathologic study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:896–905
Tsai A, McDonald AG, Rosenberg AE et al (2014) High-resolution CT with histopathological correlates of the classic metaphyseal lesion of infant abuse. Pediatr Radiol 44:124–140
American College of Radiology (2006) ACR practice guideline for skeletal surveys in children (res. 47, 17, 35). In: American College of Radiology. ACR standards. American College of Radiology, Reston, pp 203–207
SAS Institute Inc (2015) SAS/STAT® 14.1 User Guide. SAS Institute Inc, Cary
Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6:284–290
Lachin JM (2010) Biostatistical methods: the assessment of relative risks, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
Ruess L, O’Connor SC, Quinn WJ et al (2003) An animal model for the classic metaphyseal lesion of child abuse. Pediatr Radiol 33:S112
Kleinman PL, Zurakowski D, Strauss KJ et al (2008) Detection of simulated inflicted metaphyseal fractures in a fetal pig model: image optimization and dose reduction with computed radiography. Radiology 247:381–390
Thompson A, Bertocci G, Kaczor K et al (2015) Biomechanical investigation of the classic metaphyseal lesion using an immature porcine model. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:503–509
Tsai A, Coats B, Kleinman P (2017) Biomechanics of the classic metaphyseal lesion: finite element analysis. Pediatr Radiol 47:1622–1630
Karmazyn B, Duhn RD, Jennings SG et al (2012) Long bone fracture detection in suspected child abuse: contribution of lateral views. Pediatr Radiol 42:463–469
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
None
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tsai, A., Johnston, P.R., Perez-Rossello, J.M. et al. The distal tibial classic metaphyseal lesion: medial versus lateral cortical injury. Pediatr Radiol 48, 973–978 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4103-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4103-2