Literature DB >> 25393567

Results of Displaced Pediatric Tibial Spine Fractures: A Comparison Between Open, Arthroscopic, and Closed Management.

Eric W Edmonds1, Eric D Fornari, Jesse Dashe, Joanna H Roocroft, Marissa M King, Andrew T Pennock.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Displaced tibial spine fractures are frequently treated with surgical reduction and fixation, but no comparison studies have been performed. This study was undertaken to compare fragment reduction and adverse outcomes between open arthrotomy [open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF)], arthroscopy [arthroscopic-assisted internal fixation (AAIF)], and closed management [closed management and casting (CMC)] of pediatric tibial spine fractures.
METHODS: A retrospective review of children treated for displaced tibial spine fractures from 2003 to 2011 was performed after categorizing into the 3 treatment groups. Demographics, mechanism of injury, radiographic measures (plain film and computed tomography), treatment, duration of immobilization and follow-up, final range of motion, and complications were recorded. Families were contacted to obtain long-term Lysholm scores, return to activity, pain, and satisfaction with treatment.
RESULTS: Seventy-six children (mean age, 12.4 y) met criteria with 29 ORIF, 28 AAIF, and 19 CMC. Radiographic measurements between x-ray and computed tomography scans found a mean error of 1 mm (SD=1.33 mm; inter-class coefficient = 0.977, P < 0.001). Initial fracture displacement was similar between AAIF and ORIF, 10.3 ± 4.4 mm and 10.8 ± 3.9 mm; but, less in CMC group (5.3 ± 2.6 mm). The mean reduction amount was 8.6 ± 4.7, 9.1 ± 4.0, and 2.3 ± 2.6 mm, respectively. A Bonferroni post hoc analysis revealed a difference between surgical and nonoperative reduction (P < 0.001), but not between AAIF and ORIF (P=0.9). Arthrofibrosis occurred with equal frequency in surgical cohorts (AAIF 12.5%, ORIF 11.1%), compared with none in the CMC group. Yet, the CMC group had a 16.7% risk for reoperation secondary to instability, loose bodies, or impingement. Twenty-four percent of each cohort was available (at mean 6.0 y) for interview with mean (median) Lysholm score: ORIF 97.4 (99), AAIF 95 (100), and CMC 86 (97.5), P = 0.35.
CONCLUSIONS: Open or arthroscopic treatment of displaced tibial spine fractures affords a better reduction than closed management, but with higher risk for arthrofibrosis. Closed management may be successful when displacement is < 5 mm, and advanced imaging may not be necessary to delineate the amount of displacement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25393567     DOI: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000000356

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop        ISSN: 0271-6798            Impact factor:   2.324


  12 in total

1.  Surgical Reduction and Fixation of Tibial Spine Fractures in Children: Arthroscopic Suture Fixation.

Authors:  James D Bomar; Eric W Edmonds
Journal:  JBJS Essent Surg Tech       Date:  2016-05-11

Review 2.  Arthroscopic treatment of tibial eminence fracture: a systematic review of different fixation methods.

Authors:  Leonardo Osti; Matteo Buda; Francesco Soldati; Angelo Del Buono; Raffaella Osti; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 4.291

3.  Management of a type two avulsion fracture of the tibial intercondylar eminence in children: arthroscopic suture fixation versus conservative immobilization.

Authors:  Chen Zhao; Qing Bi; Mingguang Bi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Meniscal injuries in children and adolescents undergoing surgical treatment for tibial eminence fractures.

Authors:  Matthias J Feucht; Peter U Brucker; Carlo Camathias; Karl-Heinz Frosch; Michael T Hirschmann; Stephan Lorenz; Hermann O Mayr; Philipp Minzlaff; Wolf Petersen; Tim Saier; Dorien Schneidmüller; Amelie Stoehr; Daniel Wagner; Norbert P Südkamp; Philipp Niemeyer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-05-27       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Knee Extension Does Not Reliably Reduce Acute Type II Tibial Spine Fractures: MRI Evaluation of Displacement During Extension Versus Resting Flexion.

Authors:  Peter C Cannamela; Noah J Quinlan; Travis G Maak; Temitope F Adeyemi; Stephen K Aoki
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-07-18

6.  Pediatric Type II Tibial Spine Fractures: Addressing the Treatment Controversy With a Mixed-Effects Model.

Authors:  Alexander J Adams; Nathan N O'Hara; Joshua M Abzug; Julien T Aoyama; Theodore J Ganley; James L Carey; Aristides I Cruz; Henry B Ellis; Peter D Fabricant; Daniel W Green; Benton E Heyworth; Joseph A Janicki; Mininder S Kocher; John T R Lawrence; R Jay Lee; Scott D McKay; R Justin Mistovich; Neeraj M Patel; John D Polousky; Jason T Rhodes; Brant C Sachleben; M Catherine Sargent; Gregory A Schmale; Kevin G Shea; Yi-Meng Yen
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-08-28

7.  Knee central pivot bicruciate avulsion and proximal anterior cruciate ligament tear primary repair: A rare case report.

Authors:  Luigi Zanna; Armando Del Prete; Giovanni Benelli; Luca Turelli
Journal:  Trauma Case Rep       Date:  2021-02-09

8.  Non-union after Fracture of the Anterior Tibial Spine in a 6-Year-old Child: A Case Report.

Authors:  Marco Bernardes; Guido Duarte
Journal:  J Orthop Case Rep       Date:  2020 May-Jun

9.  Effect of Skeletal Maturity on Fixation Techniques for Tibial Eminence Fractures.

Authors:  Andrew P Thome; Ryan O'Donnell; Steven F DeFroda; Brian H Cohen; Aristides I Cruz; Braden C Fleming; Brett D Owens
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-11-12

10.  The Segond fracture occurs at the site of lowest sub-entheseal trabecular bone volume fraction on the tibial plateau.

Authors:  William Mullins; Gavin E Jarvis; Daniel Oluboyede; Linda Skingle; Ken Poole; Tom Turmezei; Cecilia Brassett
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2020-08-08       Impact factor: 2.610

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.