Purpose: This pilot study evaluated a novel computed tomography (CT)–based volumetric analysis tool for open tibial fractures. We hypothesized that the volumetric injury ratio (V INJ /V UNINJ ), a quantitative comparison of injured with contralateral uninjured limb segments, would correlate with clinical outcomes and serve as a prognostic marker. Methods: A retrospective review of a tibial fracture registry was conducted at a single academic institution (2014–2024). Eligible patients were older than 18 years old with preoperative bilateral lower extremity CT imaging, high-energy injuries, and ≥6 months of follow-up. Demographics, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), injury features, and outcomes including fracture-related infection (FRI), amputation, and nonunion were collected. Tissue volume was measured at the fracture midpoint and 5 cm proximal and distal, with corresponding contralateral measurements. V INJ /V UNINJ was calculated, and logistic regression estimated complication risk. The primary endpoint was a composite complication (FRI, amputation, or nonunion). Discrimination was assessed using AUROC and compared with the Gustilo-Anderson (GA) classification via the DeLong test. The Youden Index identified an optimal risk threshold. Power analysis estimated sample size requirements for a future validation study. Results: Fifteen patients met inclusion criteria (mean age 36.1 ± 13.5 years). GA distribution: 60% II, 6.7% IIIa, 26.7% IIIb, and 6.7% IIIc. The volumetric model (log[p/(1−p)] = −110.964 + 100.011 × V INJ /V UNINJ ) demonstrated a trend toward improved discriminatory ability compared with the GA model (AUROC: 0.944 vs 0.769, P = 0.068). A Youden-derived threshold (0.539) classified 5 patients (33.3%) as high-risk; all developed complications compared with 10% in the low-risk group (100% vs 10%, P = 0.001). Power analysis indicated that detecting a twofold increase in complications would require ∼23 patients per arm (46 total). Conclusion: This pilot study introduces a CT-based volumetric ratio as a quantitative tool for risk stratification in open tibial fractures. Findings suggest superior prognostic accuracy compared with GA, supporting prospective validation in larger patient cohorts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ganta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: