Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sagittal plane analysis of the open and closed methods in children with displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus (a radiological study)

  • Trauma Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the radiological outcome of open and close reduction and osteosynthesis methods in the treatment of type II and III supracondylar humerus fractures in childhood with respect to the immediate post-operative reduction quality in sagittal plane.

Method

One hundred and forty four-pediatric patients with type IIb and III supracondylar humerus fractures treated at two centers between 1995 and 2005  were evaluated radiologically within a retrospective study. Seventy-six patients (54 boys, 22 girls, mean age 7.6, range 2–12) were treated by closed reduction and cross percutaneous pinning while 68 (49 boys, 19 girls, mean age 7.3, range 2–13) were treated by open reduction. The reduction quality of the open and closed groups was compared on immediate post-operative lateral radiographs by measuring of lateral humerocapitellar angle, anterior humeral line and anterior coronoid line criteria. The reduction quality was classified excellent, good, fair and poor according to the achievement of three, two, one or none of the criteria, respectively. Reductions classified as excellent and good were introduced as acceptable results.

Results

At least one criterion was achieved in all the patients of both the groups. The mean humerocapitellar angle was 30.1° in closed reduction group while the mean of it was 29.8° in open reduced group. Radiograph of 48 (63.1%) patients with closed reduction were found to display the anterior humeral line intersecting the middle one-third of capitellum while this criteria was 45 (66%) in open reduction group. The anterior coronoid line was disturbed in three patients in each of both the groups. The reduction quality was evaluated to be excellent in 32 patients, good in 31, fair in 13 at the closed reduction group while these evaluations were 31, 20 and 17 in open reduction group, respectively. Successful reduction was achieved in 74.9% of the patients in closed reduction group and 75% of the patients in open reduction group.

Conclusion

It is concluded that there was no significant difference between closed and open reductions of pediatric displaced supracondylar fractures with regard to the radiological criteria of reduction quality in sagittal plane.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fahey JJ (1960) Fractures ofs elbow in children. Instr Course Lect 17:13–46

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Maylahn DJ, Fahey JJ (1958) Fractures of elbow in children. JAMA 166:220–228

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Boyd DW, Aronson DD (1992) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus: a prospective study of percutaneous pinning. J Pediatr Orthop 12(6):789–794

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Landin LA, Danielson LG (1986) Elbow fractures in children. An epidemiological analysis of 589 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 57:309–312

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sarıoğlu A, Arpacıoğlu HÖ, Kıral A, Kuşkucu M, Rodoplu O, Kaplan H, Çilli F (1997) Çocuk humerus suprakondiler kırıklarında açık redüksiyon ve internal fiksasyon. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 31:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  6. Otsuka NY, Kasser JR (1997) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 5:19–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mesherle WL, Meehan PL (1992) Treatment of the displaced supracondylar fracture of the humerus (type III) with closed reduction and percutaneous cross-pin fixation. J Pediatr Orthop 12:789–794

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cheng JC, Shen WY (1993) Limb fracture pattern in different pediatric age groups, a study of 3,3350 children. J Orthop Trauma 7:15–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Eliason EL (1924) Dressing for supracondylar fractures of the humerus. JAMA 82:1934–1935

    Google Scholar 

  10. Henrikson B (1966) Supracondylar fracture of the humerus in children. A late review of end-results with special reference to the cause of deformity, disability and complications. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 369:1–72

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Woods GM, Tullos HG (1977) Elbow instability and medial epicondyle fracture. Am J Sports Med 5:23–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilkins KE.(2006) Fracture and dislocation of teh elbow region. In: Rockwood CA Jr, Wilkins KE, King RE (eds). Fracture in children (3rd edn) Lippincott, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hanlon CR, Estes WL Jr (1954) Fractures in childhood, a statistical analysis. Am J Surg 87(3):312–323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. 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(5):589–595

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Diri B, Tomak Y, Karaismailoglu TN (2003) The treatment of displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children (an evaluation of three different treatment methods). Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 9(1):62–69

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bombaci H, Gereli A, Kucukyazici O, Gorgec M, Deniz G (2007) The effect of surgical exposure on the clinic outcomes of supracondylar humerus fractures in children. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 13(1):49–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. de las Heras J, Duran D, de la Cerda J, Romanillos O, Martinez-Miranda J, Rodriguez-Merchan EC (2005) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Clin Orthop Relat Res (432):57–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Abebneh M, Shannak A, Agabi S, Hadidi S (1998) The treatment of dispalced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. A comparison of three methods. Int Orthop (22):263–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Flynn JC, Matthews JG, Benoit RL (1971) Blind pinning for displased supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg A56:1096–1101

    Google Scholar 

  20. Griffin PP (1975) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus. Pediatr Clin North Am 22:477–486

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Aranson DD, Prager BI (1987) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children, a modified technique for closed pinning. Clin Orthop 219:174–184

    Google Scholar 

  22. Williamson DM, Coates CJ, Miller RK, Cole WG (1992) Normal characteristics of the Baumann (humerocapitellar) angle: an aid in assessment of supracondylar fractures. J Pediatr Orthop 12:636

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dodge HS (1972) Displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: treatment by Dunlop’s traction. J Bone Joint Surg A54:1408

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wilkins KE (1984) Fractures and dislocations of the elbow region. In: Rockwood CA, Wilkins KE, King RE (eds) Fractures in children. vol 3. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 363–575

    Google Scholar 

  25. Biyani A, Gupta SP, Sharma JC (1993) Determination of medial epicondylar epiphyseal angle for supracondylar humeral fractures in children. J Pediatr Orthop 13:94

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Roberts PH (1969) Dislocation of the elbow. Br J Surg 56:806–815

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Silberstein MJ, Brodeur AE, Graviss ER, Atchawee L (1981) Some vagaries of the capitellum. J Bone Joint Surg A63:524–528

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wilkins KE (1990) The operative management of supracondylar fractures. Orthop Clin North Am 21:269

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Pirone AM, Graham HK, Krajbich JI (1988) Management of displaced extension-type supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg A70:641

    Google Scholar 

  30. O’hara LJ, Barlow JW, Clarke NM (2000) Displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Audit changes practice. J Bone Joint Surg B82:204–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Williamson DM, Coates CJ, Miller RK, Cole WG (1992) Normal characteristics of the Baumann (humerocapitellar) angle: an aid in assessment of supracondylar fractures. J Pediatr Orthop 12:636

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Webb AJ, Sherman FC (1989) Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Pediatr Orthop 9:315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mohammad S, Rymaxzewski LA, Runciman J (1999) The Baumann angle in supracondylar fractures of the distal humerus in children. J Pediatr Orthop 19:65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Foster BK, Paterson DC (1991) Difficult supracondylar elbow fractures in children: analysis of percutaneous pinning technique. J Pediatr Orthop 12:11

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fowles JV, Kassab MT (1974) Displaced supracondylar fractures of the elbow in children. J Bone Joint Surg B56:490

    Google Scholar 

  36. French PR (1959) Varus deformity of elbow following supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Lancet 2:439

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Fuller DJ, McCullough CJ (1982) Malunited fractures of the forearm in children. J Bone Joint Surg B64:364

    Google Scholar 

  38. Skibo L, Reed MH (1994) A criterion for a true lateral radiograph of the elbow. Can Assoc Radiol J 45:287–291

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Marion J, LaGrange J, Faysse R, Rigault P (1962) Les fractures d l’extremite inferieure de l’humerus chez l’enfant. Rev Chir Orthop 48:337

    Google Scholar 

  40. Korner J, Rommens PM, Hepp P (2004) Spontaneous defect remodeling in a distal humerus fracture with extensive osseous loss: a case report of a complex elbow fracture. J Orthop Trauma 46(6):524–528

    Google Scholar 

  41. Zatti G, Bini A, De Pietri M (2001) The surgical treatment of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children by percutaneous fixation using Kirschner wires: analysis of residual deformities. Chir Organi Mov 86(2):111–117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Medicine, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Esenköy, Kozlu, 67100, Zonguldak, Turkey

    Egemen Turhan, Ahmet Ege, Ahmet Bayar & Selçuk Keser

  2. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    Cemalettin Aksoy & Mümtaz Alpaslan

Authors
  1. Egemen Turhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cemalettin Aksoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmet Ege
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ahmet Bayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Selçuk Keser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mümtaz Alpaslan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Egemen Turhan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turhan, E., Aksoy, C., Ege, A. et al. Sagittal plane analysis of the open and closed methods in children with displaced supracondylar fractures of the humerus (a radiological study). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128, 739–744 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0523-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0523-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation