Salter-Harris classification

Salter-Harris classification

WikiDoc Resources for Salter-Harris classification
Articles
Most recent articles on Salter-Harris classification Most cited articles on Salter-Harris classification Review articles on Salter-Harris classification Articles on Salter-Harris classification in N Eng J Med, Lancet, BMJ
Media
Powerpoint slides on Salter-Harris classification Images of Salter-Harris classification Photos of Salter-Harris classification Podcasts & MP3s on Salter-Harris classification Videos on Salter-Harris classification
Evidence Based Medicine
Cochrane Collaboration on Salter-Harris classification Bandolier on Salter-Harris classification TRIP on Salter-Harris classification
Clinical Trials
Ongoing Trials on Salter-Harris classification at Clinical Trials.gov Trial results on Salter-Harris classification Clinical Trials on Salter-Harris classification at Google
Guidelines / Policies / Govt
US National Guidelines Clearinghouse on Salter-Harris classification NICE Guidance on Salter-Harris classification NHS PRODIGY Guidance FDA on Salter-Harris classification CDC on Salter-Harris classification
Books
Books on Salter-Harris classification
News
Salter-Harris classification in the news Be alerted to news on Salter-Harris classification News trends on Salter-Harris classification
Commentary
Blogs on Salter-Harris classification
Definitions
Definitions of Salter-Harris classification
Patient Resources / Community
Patient resources on Salter-Harris classification Discussion groups on Salter-Harris classification Patient Handouts on Salter-Harris classification Directions to Hospitals Treating Salter-Harris classification Risk calculators and risk factors for Salter-Harris classification
Healthcare Provider Resources
Symptoms of Salter-Harris classification Causes & Risk Factors for Salter-Harris classification Diagnostic studies for Salter-Harris classification Treatment of Salter-Harris classification
Continuing Medical Education (CME)
CME Programs on Salter-Harris classification
International
Salter-Harris classification en Espanol Salter-Harris classification en Francais
Business
Salter-Harris classification in the Marketplace Patents on Salter-Harris classification
Experimental / Informatics
List of terms related to Salter-Harris classification

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Mohammadmain Rezazadehsaatlou[2].

Overview

Injuries leading to the bone fracture affecting the epiphyseal plate, or physis, are important and common in orthopedic medicine and the cause diagnostic and treatment challenges for orthopaedic surgeons. The related incidence rate of these fracture among pedicatric population is 15-20%.

Historical Perspective

In 1863, Foucher JT was the first person who described the injuries affecting the epiphyseal plate.

In 1895, Poland J, classified the injuries affecting the epiphyseal plat into the four types.

In 1936 , Aitken AP, defined the specific differences of different types of physes based on their differences in: structure, location, weightbearing status, and susceptibility to injury.

In 1963, two Canadian orthopaedic surgeons, Robert B. Salter (1924–2010) and W. Robert Harris (1922–2005), introduced a physeal fracture classification system according to the anatomy, fracture pattern, and prognosis of bone fracture.

Then, various researchers and physicians tried to expanded the original work of Salter and Harris in order to make it to be to be more comprehensive:

In 1968, Rang M, added a different sixth type of physeal injuries describing the caused damage to the perichondral ring due to the direct open injuries to the affected bone.

In 1981, Ogden JA, described nine types of injuries such as injuries affecting the developing bone’s other growth mechanisms.

Salter-Harris classification

Type	Descrpstion	Image	Radiography
Normal		Normal Bone
Type I	Origin: slipped Frequency: 5-7% cannot occur if the growth plate is fused cit good prognosis Mechanism: Fractured plane involved the whole growth plate, not involving bone	Type 1-Salter-Harris classification
Type II	Origin: above Frequency: 75% good prognosis Mechanism: Fractured plane involved most of the growth plate and up through the metaphysis good prognosis	Type 2 Salter-Harris classification
Type III	Origin: lower Frequency: 7-10% cannot occur if the growth plate is fused cit good prognosis Mechanism: Fractured plane involved the growth plate through the epiphysis poorer prognosis as the proliferative and reserve zones are interrupted	Type 3 Salter-Harris classification
Type IV	Origin: through or transverse or together Frequency: 10% cannot occur intra-articular good prognosis Mechanism: Fractured plane involved directly through the metaphysis, growth plate and down through the epiphysis poor prognosis as the proliferative and reserve zones are interrupted	Type 4- Salter-Harris classification
Type V	Origin: ruined or rammed Frequency: <1% cannot occur if the growth plate is fused cit good prognosis Mechanism: Fractured plane dose note involved the growth plate but damages it by direct compression worst prognosis	Type 5 Salter-Harris classification
Rare Types: Type VI	injury to the perichondral structures
Rare Types: Type VII	An isolated damage of the epiphyseal plate
Rare Types: Type VIII	An isolated damage of the metaphysis, with a potential injury due to the endochondral ossification
Rare Types: Type IX	An isolated damage of the periosteum that may interfere with membranous growth plane

See also

• Humerus fracture

Template:Fractures