.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.jpg)
Percutaneous Pinning in Displaced Supracondyler Humerus Fracture with Two Crossed K-wires in Children
Keywords:
supracondylar humerus fracture, crossed k wire fixation, closed reduction.Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the result of percutaneous pinning in displaced supracondylar fracture of humerus with two crossed k wires in children and to compare the results with the published literature. Study design: This is a descriptive observational study. Place and duration: This study was conducted at Orthopaedic B unit Lady Reading Hospital Peshawar, from April 2011 to April 2014 on 100 patients with displaced supracondylar fracture of humerus. Material & Methods: One hundred patients with closed supracondylar humerus fractures admitted through emergency were included in this study. Patients above the age of 12 years, open fracture, poly trauma and patients with undisplaced type I fractured were excluded while patients with closed supracondylar humerus type II and III fractures below the age of 12 years were included in the study. All fractures were treated with close reduction and percutaneous pinning with two crossed k wires under general anesthesia. Follow up was done for one year with assessment of radiological healing and clinical outcome that is union, joint movement, deformity and neurovascular injuries. Results: Among 100 patients 60(60%) were male and 40(40%) female. Left involved in 48 (48%) patients and right in 52 (52%) patients. The mean age at the time of presentation was 6.5 years. Among 100 patients 35 were type II and 65 were type III according to Gartland’s classification. Union was achieved in all patients within 4 to 6 weeks. The mean period of fracture union was 4.8 weeks. All patients got union in an acceptable position. 2 patients (2%) developed compartment syndrome. Pin site infection was the common complication and was noted in 15% patients. No deep infection was noted in these cases, and they were treated with oral anti biotics and dressing. All recovered after removal of pins. Neuropraxia of the ulnar nerve was noted in 2%. No iatrogenic vascular injury was noted. Complete range of movement was achieved after 4 to 6 week. None of the patients developed loss of fixation or cubitus varus deformity. Excellent results were in 60% , good results in 39% patients, poor results in only two (2%) patient. Conclusion: Closed reduction and two cross k wires pinning is a safe and effective method for treating supracondylar fracture of humerus and gives excellent results regarding healing and function.
References
Russell. Norman s Williums,`editor. Bailey and Love Short practice of Surgery. 24th ed. UK Arnold:381.
2. Wilkins KE (1991): Fractures and dislocations of the elbow region, in Rockwood CA Jr, Wilkins KE, King RE (eds): Fractures in Children, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, vol 3, pp 526-617.
3. Landin LA (1983): Fracture patterns in children:Analysis of 8,682 fractures with special reference to incidence, etiology and secular changes in a Swedish urban population, 1950– 1979. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl;202:1-109.
4. Henrikson B (1966): Supracondylar fracture of the humerus in children: A lateral view of end-results with special reference to the cause of deformity, disability and complications. Acta Chir Scand Suppl ;369:1-72.
5. Hanlon CR, Estes WL Jr (1954): Fractures in childhood: A statistical analysis. Am JSurg ;87:312323.
6. Arnold JA, Nasca RJ, Nelson CL (1977): Supracondylar fractures of the humerus: The role of dynamic factors in prevention of deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am ;59:589-595
7. Minkowitz B, Busch MT (1994): Supracondylar humerus fractures: Current trends and controversies. Orthop Clin North Am ;25:581-594.
8. Gartland JJ (1959): Management of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Surg Gynecol Obstet ;109:145-154
9. Kasser J, Beaty J (2006): Supracondylar fractures of the distal humerus, in Beaty JH, Kasser J, eds: Rockwood and Green’s Fractures in Children, ed 6. Philadelphia, PA, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, pp 543-589.
10 Blakemore LC, Cooperman DR,Thompson GH, Wathey C, Ballock RT (2000): Compartment syndrome in ipsilateral humerus and forearm fractures in children. Clin Orthop Relat Res; (376):32-38.
11 Choi PD, Melikian R, Skaggs DL (2010): Riskfactors for vascular repair and compartment syndrome in the pulseless supracondylar humerus fracture in children. J Pediatr Orthop ;30(1): 50-56.
12 Herzenberg JE, Koreska J, Carroll NC, Rang M (1988): Biomechanical testing of pin fixation techniques for pediatric supracondylar elbow fractures. Orthopaedic Transactions ;12:678-679.
13 Skaggs DL, Hale JM, Bassett 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(5):735-740.
14 Shahab ud din et al(2013). Supra condylar humerus fracture in children: management by percutaneous lateral entry pin fixation. JPMI; 28: 103-6.
15 Gupta N, Kay RM, Leitch K, Femino JD, Tolo VT,Skaggs DL (2004). Effectof surgicaldelayo perioperative complications and need for open reduction In supracondylar humerus fracture In children.J pediatr orthop; 24:245b-8.
16 Mehlman CT, Strub WM, Roy DR,Wall EJ, Crawford AH (2001). The effect of surgical timing o the perioperative complications of treatmetof supracondylar humeral fractures I children. J Bone Joit Surg Am; 83:323-7.
17 Sing S, Paj DR, Kaur A,Soe H H (2013). Crossed verses lateral pinning I the treatment ofdisplaced extension type supracondylar fracture of humerus: A prospective study. The internet journal of orthopaedic surgery; 21-2.
