You are here » CORE INFO » Reviews » Fractures » Which fractures are indicative of abuse? » Metaphyseal fractures » Fatally abused children with metaphyseal fractures

Fatally abused children with metaphyseal fractures

The following is a summary of the systematic review findings up to the date of our most recent literature search. If you have a specific clinical case, we strongly recommend you read all of the relevant references as cited and look for additional material published outside our search dates.

 

  • Five studies by Kleinman et al 1-5 delineated the histologic / radiologic correlates of classical metaphyseal fractures in 31 fatally abused infants
  • Age range: three weeks – 10.5 months (mean: three months)
  • There were 165 fractures in the 31 children; 72 long bone fractures; 64 (89%) were classical metaphyseal lesions in 20 children
  • The commonest abusive fracture found was metaphyseal
  • The commonest site was the tibia
  • The fractures were commonly bilateral and symmetrical
  • Specimen radiography increased the yield of fractures noted on skeletal survey from 58% to 92%

Click here to open

References

  1. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr, Richmond JM, Blackbourne BD. Inflicted skeletal injury: a postmortem radiologic-histopathologic study in 31 infants. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1995;165(3):647-650 [Pubmed]
  2. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr. A regional approach to classic metaphyseal lesions in abused infants: the distal tibia. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1996:166(5);1207-1212 [Pubmed]
  3. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr. A regional approach to the classic metaphyseal lesion in abused infants: the proximal humerus. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1996;167(6):1399-1403 [Pubmed]
  4. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr. A regional approach to the classic metaphyseal lesion in abused infants: the proximal tibia. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1996;166(2):421-426 [Pubmed]
  5. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr. A regional approach to the classic metaphyseal lesion in abused infants: the distal femur. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1998;170(1):43-47 [Pubmed]

 

^ back to top