E Sahin1, S Zehir2, S Sipahioglu3. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey. 2. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Hitit University, Çorum, Turkey. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Harran University, Şanlıurfa, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to compare the clinical results of pediatric supracondylar humerus fracture cases requiring open reduction through medial approach with posterior approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort of 67 cases of pediatric supracondylar fractures was reviewed. Thirty-three patients (20 males, 13 female, average age: 8.3 ± 3.131) were treated with medial approach were compared with 34 patients (19 males, 15 females, average age: 7.5 ± 3.146) treated with posterior exposure. Median follow-up period of the first group was 35.04 months (range: 17-76 months) and of the second group was 36.04 (range: 16-65 months). Radiological evaluation included Baumann angle, carrying angles, and lateral humero-capitellar angles. Functional and cosmetic evaluation was assessed with range-of-motion measurements and the criteria defined by Flynn et al. RESULTS: No differences between groups were noted regarding gender, age, and follow-up periods. Operative time was significantly shorter in medial approach group [60.0 ± 14.5 vs. 75.8 ± 17.6 min (P = 0.002)]. Radiological measurements (Baumann, humero-capitellar, and carrying angles) were also similar between groups. When evaluated patients according to Flynn's criteria, for medial group, 31 cases (93.9%) had good-perfect result regarding ROM loss, whereas for posterior group 33 cases (97%) had good-perfect result. Regarding carrying angle change and posterior group were slightly better than medial group (perfect result observed in 91.1% vs 81.8%, respectively). The differences did not show statistical significance. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of supracondylar humerus fractures in children, both surgical approaches revealed similar functional and radiological outcomes with shorter operative time when medial approach was utilized.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to compare the clinical results of pediatric supracondylar humerus fracture cases requiring open reduction through medial approach with posterior approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort of 67 cases of pediatric supracondylar fractures was reviewed. Thirty-three patients (20 males, 13 female, average age: 8.3 ± 3.131) were treated with medial approach were compared with 34 patients (19 males, 15 females, average age: 7.5 ± 3.146) treated with posterior exposure. Median follow-up period of the first group was 35.04 months (range: 17-76 months) and of the second group was 36.04 (range: 16-65 months). Radiological evaluation included Baumann angle, carrying angles, and lateral humero-capitellar angles. Functional and cosmetic evaluation was assessed with range-of-motion measurements and the criteria defined by Flynn et al. RESULTS: No differences between groups were noted regarding gender, age, and follow-up periods. Operative time was significantly shorter in medial approach group [60.0 ± 14.5 vs. 75.8 ± 17.6 min (P = 0.002)]. Radiological measurements (Baumann, humero-capitellar, and carrying angles) were also similar between groups. When evaluated patients according to Flynn's criteria, for medial group, 31 cases (93.9%) had good-perfect result regarding ROM loss, whereas for posterior group 33 cases (97%) had good-perfect result. Regarding carrying angle change and posterior group were slightly better than medial group (perfect result observed in 91.1% vs 81.8%, respectively). The differences did not show statistical significance. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of supracondylar humerus fractures in children, both surgical approaches revealed similar functional and radiological outcomes with shorter operative time when medial approach was utilized.