Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Orthopaedics
Published in: International Orthopaedics 4/2009

01-08-2009 | Original Paper

Operative management of type III extension supracondylar fractures in children

Authors: Cemal Kazimoglu, Murat Çetin, Muhittin Şener, Haluk Aguş, Önder Kalanderer

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare primarily open versus primarily closed surgical treatment of Gartland type III extension supracondylar fractures in children. Also the outcomes of different pinning techniques in open surgery were evaluated retrospectively. Eighty displaced type III extension supracondylar fractures treated consecutively at two different centres were included. The treatment protocol of one institute was primarily closed reduction and percutaneous cross-pinning (n = 43). The treatment protocol of the other institute was primarily open reduction and internal fixation (n = 37) with two lateral parallel pins (n = 11), cross pins (n = 11) and two lateral and one medial pin (n = 15) according to the stability and configuration of the fracture. According to Flynn’s criteria the outcomes of the open and closed reduction groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Although the outcomes of closed reduction showed no superiority over open reduction, it should be the first choice of treatment due to its low morbidity and short hospital stay.
Literature
1.
Agus H, Kalanderer O, Kayalı C, Eryanılmaz G (2002) Skeletal traction and delayed percutaneous fixation of complicated supracondylar humerus fractures due to delayed or unsuccessful reductions and extensive swelling in children. J Pediatr Orthop B 11(2):150–154PubMedCrossRef
2.
Battagila TC, Armstrong DG, Schwend RM (2002) Factors affecting forearm compartment pressures in children with supracondylar fractures of the humerus. J Pediatr Orthop 22:431–439CrossRef
3.
Cramer KE, Devito DP, Green NE (1992) Comparison of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning versus open reduction and percutaneous pinning in displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Orthop Trauma 6:407–412PubMedCrossRef
4.
Flynn JC, Matthews JG, Benoit RL (1974) Blind pinning of displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am 56:263–272PubMed
5.
Eidelman M, Hos N, Katzman A, Bialik V (2007) Prevention of ulnar nerve injury during fixation of supracondylar fractures in children by ‘flexion-extension cross-pinning’ technique. J Pediatr Orthop B 16(3):221–224PubMed
6.
Gartland JJ (1959) Management of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Surg Gynecol Obstet 109:145–154PubMed
7.
Kalanderer O, Reisoglu A, Sürer L, Agus H (2007) How should one treat iatrogenic ulnar injury after closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of paediatric supracondylar humeral fractures. Injury 76:253–256
8.
Kotwal PP, Mani GV, Dave PK (1989) Open reduction and internal fixation of displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus. Int Surg 74:119–122PubMed
9.
Larson L, Firoozbakhsh K, Passarelli R, Bosch P (2006) Biomechanical analysis of pinning techniques for pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures. J Pediatr Orthop 26(5):573–557PubMed
10.
Lyons JP, Ashley E, Hoffer MM (1998) Ulnar nerve palsies after percutaneous cross-pinning of supracondylar fractures in children’s elbows. J Pediatr Orthop 18:43–45PubMedCrossRef
11.
Mulhall KJ, Abuzakuk T, Curtin W, O’Sullivan M (2000) Displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Int Orthop 24(4):221–223PubMedCrossRef
12.
Oh CW, Park CB, Kim PT, Park IH, Kyung HS, Ihn CJ (2003) Completely displaced supracondylar humerus fractures in children: results of open reduction versus closed reduction. J Orthop Sci 8:137–141PubMedCrossRef
13.
Özkoc G, Gonc U, Kayaalp A, Teker K, Peker TT (2004) Displaced supracondylar humeral fractures in children: open reduction vs. closed reduction and pinning. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124:547–551PubMedCrossRef
14.
Rockwood CA Jr, Wilkins KE, Beaty JH (1996) Fractures in children, vol 3. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia
15.
Sadiq MZ, Syed T, Travlos J (2007) Management of grade III supracondylar fracture of the humerus by straight-arm lateral traction. Int Orthop 31(2):155–158PubMedCrossRef
16.
Sankar WN, Hebela NM, Skaggs DL, Flynn JM (2007) Loss of pin fixation in displaced supracondylar humeral fractures in children: causes and prevention. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(4):713–717PubMedCrossRef
17.
Skaggs DL, Cluck MW, Mostofi A, Flynn JY, Kay RM (2004) Lateral-entry pin fixation in the management of supracondylar fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:702–707PubMed
18.
Skaggs DL, Hayle JM, Basset J, Kaminsky C, Kay RM, Tolo VT (2001) Operative treatment of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. The consequences of pin placement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A(5):735–740
19.
Skaggs DL, Kay RM, Tolo VT (2002) Fracture stability after pinning of displaced supracondylar distal humerus fractures in children. J Pediatr Orthop 22(5):697PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zionts LE, McKellop HA, Hathaway R (1994) Torsional strength of pin configurations used to fix supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:253–256PubMed
Metadata
Title
Operative management of type III extension supracondylar fractures in children
Authors
Cemal Kazimoglu
Murat Çetin
Muhittin Şener
Haluk Aguş
Önder Kalanderer
Publication date
01-08-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0605-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

International Orthopaedics 4/2009 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Bristow-Latarjet procedure with specific instrumentation: study of 34 cases

Original Paper

Lateral fixation of open AO type-B2 ankle fractures: the Knowles pin versus plate

Original Paper

The use of a dual-articulation acetabular cup system to prevent dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: analysis of 384 cases at a mean follow-up of 15 years

Original Paper

Association of oestrogen receptor gene polymorphism with the long-term results of rotational acetabular osteotomy

Original Paper

The Bimetric cementless total hip replacement: 7–18 year follow-up assessing the influence of acetabular design on survivorship

Original Paper

Comparison of distal and proximal centralising devices in hip arthroplasty