Comparison of the radiographic and functional outcome in pediatric orthopaedic patients with Gartland type II supracondylar fracture treated by operative versus non operative management

Wesson Pious A. Espiritu; Juan Alejandro Legaspi

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20234033

Authors

Wesson Pious A. Espiritu Department of Orthopaedics, Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center, Manila, Philippines
Juan Alejandro Legaspi Department of Orthopaedics, Jose R. Reyes Memorial Medical Center, Manila, Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20234033

Keywords:

Anterior humeral line, Baumann’s angle, Percutaneous pinning, Long arm posterior splint, Supracondylar fracture, Gartland II fracture

Abstract

Background: The non-operative method of closed reduction and application of long arm posterior splint and the operative method of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning are both putative management for Gartland II supracondylar fracture. The purpose of this study is to compare which method is superior in the management of this type of fracture thru the comparison of the radiographic as well as the functional outcome.

Methods: This study includes 51 pediatric patients undergoing supracondylar fracture treatment. The enrolled participants were randomly allocated to one of the two groups to receive either non operative or operative treatment. Radiographic and functional outcome was assessed post treatment.

Results: The operative group exhibited significant superiority versus the non operative group as reflected by the results of the post-treatment radiographs utilizing the anterior humeral line while the Baumann’s angle showed no significant difference between the two groups. Moreover, the operative group demonstrated a better Mayo elbow performance score total per follow up, only in the first 3 months but showed no significant difference thereafter.

Conclusions: We therefore conclude that non operative and operative management are both effective treatment for Gartland II supracondylar fracture. The operative group showed significant superiority with results of the anterior humeral line falling mostly at the central one-third of the capitellum. The operative group manifested a better Mayo elbow performance score total only during the first 3 months of follow up.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Dimeglio A. Growth in pediatric orthopaedics. In: Morrissy RT, Weinstein SL, editors. Lovell and Winter’s pediatric orthopaedics. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins. 2006;58.

Cheng JC, Ng BK, Ying SY, Lam PK. A 10-year study of the changes in the pattern and treatment of 6493 fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999;19(3):344-50.

Omid R, Choi PD, Skaggs DL. Supracondylar humeral fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(5):1121-32.

Moraleda L, Valencia M, Barco R, Gonzalez-Moran G. Natural history of unreduced Gartland type-II supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: a two to thirteen-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(1):28-34.

Beaty JH, Kasser JR. Rockwood and Wilkins’ fractures in children. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. 2010;488-532.

Cheng JC, Lam TP, Maffulli N. Epidemiological features of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in Chinese children. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2001;10(1):63-7.

Hannah NL, Matthias S, Jan B. The displaced supracondylar humerus fracture: indications for surgery and surgical options: a 2014 update. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2014;44(26):64-9.

Hadlow AT, Devane P, Nicol RO. A selective treatment approach to supracondylar fracture of the humerus in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 1996;16(1):104-6.

Gartland JJ. Management of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1959;109(2):145-54.

Gadgil A, Hayhurst C, Maffulli N, Dwyer JS. Elevated, straight-arm traction for supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(1):82-7.

Angst F, John M, Pap G, Mannion AF, Anne FM, Daniel BH, Matthias F et al. Comprehensive assessment of clinical outcome and quality of life after total elbow arthroplasty. Arthritis Rhe. 2005;53(1):73e82.

Long UG, Franceschi F, Loppini M, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Rating systems for evaluation of the elbow. Br Med Bull. 2008;87:131e161.

Michael CC, Nicolas SB, Frederick MA, Benjamin MM, Richard AS, Thomas WT. Accuracy and Reliability of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;39(6):1146-50.

Parikh SN, Wall EJ, Foad S, Wiersema B, Nolte B. Displaced type II extension supracondylar humerus fractures: do they all need pinning? J Pediatr Orthop. 2004;24(4):380-84.

Gordon JR, Patton CM, Luhmann SJ, Bassett GS, Schoenecker PL. Fractures stability after pinning of displaced supracondylar distal humerus fracture in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21(3):313-8.

Boyd DW, Aronson DD. Supracondylar fractures of the humerus: a prospective study of percutaneous pinning. J Pediatr Orthop. 1992;12(6):789-94.

Pirone AM, Graham HK, Krajbich JI. Management of displaced extensiontype supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70(5):641-50.

Mehlman CT, Crawford AH, McMillion TL, Roy DR. Operative treatment of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children: the Cincinnati experience. Acta Orthop Belg. 1996;62(1):41-50.

Kishore M, Kaye W. The Treatment of Displaced Supracondylar Humerus Fractures: Evidence-based Guideline. J Pediatr Orthop. 2012;32(2):S143-52.

Charles AG, Megan JMP, Melanie S, Melissa K, Jennifer AS, Leesa G. Elbow Radiographic Anatomy: Measurement Techniques and Normative Data. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(9):1236-46.

Shriners Hospital for Children and Washington University School of Medicine, Department ofOrthopaedic Surgery, St. Louis, MO, USA. Available at: https://www.shrinerschildrens.org/en/locations/st-louis. Accessed on 25 June, 2023.

Simanovsky N, Lamdan R, Mosheiff R, Simanovsky N. Underreduced supracondylar fractureof the humerus in children. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;27(7):733-8.

Simanovsky N, Lamdan R, Hiller N, Simanovsky N. The measurements and standardization of humerocondylar angle in children. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2008;28(4):463-5.

Rogers LF, Rockwood CA Jr. Separation of the entire distal humeral epiphysis. Radiology. 1973;106(2):393-400.

Herman MJ, Boardman MJ, Hoover JR, Chafetz RS. Relationship of the anterior humeral line to the capitellar ossific nucleus: variability with age. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(9):2188-93.

Silberstein MJ, Brodeur AE, Graviss ER. Some vagaries of the capitellum. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;61(2):244-7.

Otsuka NY, Kasser JR. Supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1997;5(1):19-26.

Acton JD, McNally MA. Baumann’s confusing legacy. Injury. 2001;32(1):41-3.

Skaggs DL, Cluck MW, Mostofi A, Flynn JM, Kay RM. Lateral-entry pin fixation in the management of supracondylar fractures in children. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2004;86(7):702-7.

Williamson DM, Coates CJ, Miller RK, Cole WG. Normal characteristics of the Baumann (humerocapitellar) angle: an aid in assessment of supracondylar fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1992;12(5):636-9.

Camp J, Ishizue K, Gomez M, Gelberman R, Akeson W. Alteration of Baumann’s angle by humeral position: implications for treatment of supracondylar humerus fractures. J Pediatr Orthop. 1993;13(4):521-5.