| Literature DB >> 29451050 |
Noora Tuomilehto1, Antti Sommarhem2, Aarno Y Nietosvaara2.
Abstract
Background and purpose - The long-term outcome of pin-fixed supracondylar humerus fractures (SCHF) in children is not well known. We assessed the 7- to 12-year outcome in 168 children. Patients and methods - During 2002-2006, 210 domestic children (age 7 (1-14) years) with SCHF (Gartland III 79%, Gartland II 19%, and flexion type 2%) were pin fixed in Helsinki. 36 (17%) patients had a nerve palsy. Radiographic alignment was regarded as satisfactory in 81% of patients (Baumann angle (BA) within ±10˚ of normal range and whose anterior humeral line (AHL) crossed the capitulum). After a mean follow-up of 9 (7-12) years, 168 (80%) patients answered a questionnaire regarding elbow appearance (scale 0-10), function (scale 0-10), and pain (scale 0-10), and symmetry of range of motion (ROM) and carrying angle (CA). 65 (31%) patients also attended a clinical follow-up examination. Results - Mean subjective score for appearance was 8.7 (2-10) and for function 9.0 (2-10) (n = 168). Elbow ROM asymmetry was experienced by 28% and elbow CA asymmetry by 17% of the patients. Elbow pain was reported by 14%, and was more common in children with nerve injuries. Long-term outcome was good or excellent in 60/65 and CA in 56/65 of the follow-up visit patients using Flynn's criteria. BA exceeding normal values by 10˚ was associated with lower subjective outcome; AHL crossing point with the capitulum was not associated with outcome. Interpretation - Long-term subjective outcome is satisfactory with few exceptions if elbow ROM and CA are restored within 10° of the uninjured elbow. Radiographs at fracture union have little prognostic value. Nerve injuries can cause long-term pain.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29451050 PMCID: PMC6055784 DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2018.1438765
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Orthop ISSN: 1745-3674 Impact factor: 3.717
Figure 1.Operatively treated supracondylar humerus fractures 2002–2006. Patients’ participation in the study and fracture classification by Gartland.
Questionnaire and answers (patients n = 168)
| Answers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Questions | Answer options | “yes” | mean (range) | ||
| 1. | How satisfied are you with the appearance of the fractured elbow? | 0–10 | Very unsatisfied—very satisfied | 8.7 (2–10) | |
| 2. | How satisfied are you with the functional outcome of the fractured elbow? | 0–10 | Very unsatisfied—very satisfied | 9.0 (2–10) | |
| 3. | Do you have any pain at rest in the fractured elbow? | no/yes | 7 | ||
| If you answered yes, how intense has the pain been in the past week? | 0–10 | No pain—worst pain you can imagine | 3.0 (1–8) | ||
| 4. | Do you have any pain in motion in the fractured elbow? | no/yes | 21 | ||
| If you answered yes, how intense has the pain been in the past week? | 0–10 | No pain—worst pain you can imagine | 3.9 (1–8) | ||
| 5. | Are the carrying angles of your elbows symmetrical? | no/yes | 140 | ||
| 6. | Do your elbows flex symmetrically? | no/yes | 149 | ||
| 7. | Do your elbows extend symmetrically? | no/yes | 132 | ||
Figure 2.Carrying angle and elbow range of motion in 65 patients at mean 9 years after pin fixation of supracondylar humerus fracture.
Patients’ subjective estimation compared with the control visit findings (n = 65)
| Asymmetry | Unrecognized asymmetry >5° | Recognized asymmetry >5° | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≤ 5˚ | 6–10° | 11–15° | > 15° | 6–10° | 11–15° | > 15° | ||
| Flexion deficit | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Extension | deficit | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| hyper | 9 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | |
| Carrying angle | varus | 2 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 |
| valgus | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Long-term outcome by Flynn’s criteria at follow-up visit (n = 65)
| Fracture type | Loss of motion | Loss of carrying angle | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Gartland) | II | III | Flexion | II | III | Flexion |
| n = 10 | n = 53 | n = 2 | n = 10 | n = 53 | n = 2 | |
| Satisfactory | ||||||
| Excellent (0–5˚) | 8 | 46 | 2 | 6 | 38 | 1 |
| Good (6–10˚) | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 1 |
| Fair (11–15˚) | 0 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Unsatisfactory | ||||||
| Poor (> 15˚) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |