Praxis Medica
Sign in
Issue image

More articles from Volume 51, Issue 1, 2022

The impact of body weight on the secondary osification centers development and the term of closure of the anterior fontanelle in infants

Students' attitudes about the quality and effectiveness of online compared to traditional teaching of histology and embryology during the COVID-19 pandemic

Assessment of neutrophil-lymphocyte and platelet-lymphocyte ratio in patients with hashimoto's thyroiditis

Frequency of depression in patients affected by subclinical and clinical hypothyroidism: A cross-section study

Factors associated with involuntary hospitalization

Operative treatment of supracondylar elbow fracture in a child using the percutaneous method

Đorđe Kadić ,
Đorđe Kadić
View authors publications

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
A. Bozović ,
A. Bozović
View authors publications

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
G. Radojević ,
G. Radojević
View authors publications

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
Lj. Jakšić ,
Lj. Jakšić
View authors publications

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar
M. Milić Orcid logo
M. Milić
View authors publications

Search this author on:

PubMed | Google Scholar

Published: 01.12.2021.

Volume 51, Issue 1 (2022)

pp. 55-58;

https://doi.org/10.5937/pramed2202055k

Abstract

Supracondylar fractures are the most common elbow injuries in children and are associated with prolonged morbidity due to possible complications that can lead to deformity. The decision on the treatment method is made based on Gartland's classification (I, II, III and IV types) and the treatment can be non-operative (I and II type) and operative (III and IV type). When it comes to the percutaneous method, the main dilemma for its implementation is related to pinning from the medial side of the elbow because there is a high possibility of injury to the n. ulnaris which, according to data from the literature, occurs in some 15% of cases. The aim of treatment is pain relief and maintenance of the patient's functional status. The case presented in this paper represents a patient with whom the clinician is most likely to encounter and shows the clinical assessment of the patient's condition, the way of deciding on the treatment method and the outcome of the treatment undertaken. Agirl, 8 years old, was injured when she fell while playing. At the Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Clinical Hospital Center Kosovska Mitrovica, the patient was clinically and radiographically examined, and the injury was defined as a supracondylar fracture type III according to Gartland. After adequate preoperative preparation under general anesthesia, without the use of a drape - Turniquet, with the use of a C-bow, repositioning is performed and after obtaining a satisfactory position of the fragments, they are fixed percutaneously with 3 Kirschner needles, two medially and one laterally. The patient was discharged 3 days after admission with controls performed for 7 days. The Kirschner pins were removed on the 5th week after the operation and physical treatment was started, after which the movements of flexion and extension as well as pronation and supination were fully restored. Similar results are found in the literature. This information can be helpful in advising parents about what to expect after their child's injury. Also, they represent evidence of good clinical practice for orthopedic doctors and physiotherapists.

References

1.
Cheng JCY, Shen WY. Limb Fracture Pattern in Different Pediatric Age Groups. Vol. 7, Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 1993. p. 15–22.
2.
Wilkins KE. Fractures and dislocations of the elbow region. In 1991. p. 526–617.
3.
Alburger PD, Weidner PL, Betz RR. Supracondylar Fractures of the Humerus in Children. Vol. 12, Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 1992. p. 16–9.
4.
Garg S, Weller A, Larson AN, Fletcher ND, Kwon M, Schiller J, et al. Clinical Characteristics of Severe Supracondylar Humerus Fractures in Children. Vol. 34, Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 2014. p. 34–9.
5.
Weller A, Garg S, Larson AN, Fletcher ND, Schiller JR, Kwon M, et al. Management of the Pediatric Pulseless Supracondylar Humeral Fracture: Is Vascular Exploration Necessary? Vol. 95, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2013. p. 1906–12.
6.
Heggeness MH, Sanders JO, Murray J, Pezold R, Sevarino KS. Management of Pediatric Supracondylar Humerus Fractures. Vol. 23, Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2015. p. e49–51.
7.
SKAGGS D, PERSHAD J. Pediatric elbow trauma. Vol. 13, Pediatric Emergency Care. 1997. p. 425–34.
8.
Hope N, Varacallo M. Supracondylar Humerus Fractures.
9.
Iorio C, Crostelli M, Mazza O, Rota P, Polito V, Perugia D. Conservative versus surgical treatment of Gartland type 2 supracondylar humeral fractures: What can help us choosing? Vol. 16, Journal of Orthopaedics. 2019. p. 31–5.
10.
Abzug JM, Herman MJ. Management of Supracondylar Humerus Fractures in Children: Current Concepts. Vol. 20, Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2012. p. 69–77.
11.
Uludağ A, Tosun HB, Aslan TT, Uludağ Ö, Gunay A. Comparison of Three Different Approaches in Pediatric Gartland Type 3 Supracondylar Humerus Fractures Treated With Cross-Pinning. Cureus. 2020.
12.
Vaquero-Picado A, González-Morán G, Moraleda L. Management of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Vol. 3, EFORT Open Reviews. 2018. p. 526–40.
13.
Lu X, Yan G, Lu M, Guo Y. Epidemiologic features and management of elbow dislocation with associated fracture in pediatric population. Vol. 96, Medicine. 2017. p. e8595.
14.
Zionts LE, Woodson CJ, Manjra N, Zalavras C. Time of Return of Elbow Motion after Percutaneous Pinning of Pediatric Supracondylar Humerus Fractures. Vol. 467, Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2009. p. 2007–10.
15.
Wang YL, Chang WN, Hsu CJ, Sun SF, Wang JL, Wong CY. The Recovery of Elbow Range of Motion After Treatment of Supracondylar and Lateral Condylar Fractures of the Distal Humerus in Children. Vol. 23, Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2009. p. 120–5.

Citation

Copyright

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Most read articles

Indexed by
DOAJ
Google Scholar
ERIHPLUS
MIAR I
Crossref