| Literature DB >> 35884033 |
Lisette C Langenberg1,2,3, Kimberly I M van den Ende3, Max Reijman3, G J Juliën Boersen3, Joost W Colaris3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This review aims to identify what angulation may be accepted for the conservative treatment of pediatric radial neck fractures and how the range of motion (ROM) at follow-up is influenced by the type of fracture treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A PRISMA-guided systematic search was performed for studies that reported on fracture angulation, treatment details, and ROM on a minimum of five children with radial neck fractures that were followed for at least one year. Data on fracture classification, treatment, and ROM were analyzed.Entities:
Keywords: elbow motion; pediatric radial neck fracture; radial neck angulation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35884033 PMCID: PMC9324597 DOI: 10.3390/children9071049
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Children (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9067
Figure 1PRISMA-guided systematic search.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
| Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|
| Prospective or retrospective follow-up study | Review/meta-analysis |
| ≥5 children with radial neck fractures | Age > 16 years |
| Fracture angulation should be reported | Elbow prosthesis |
| Radiological imaging at presentation | Animals |
| Outcome: range of motion at follow-up | Less than one year follow-up |
| Outcome linked to fracture angulation and treatment | |
| Language: English, Dutch |
Risk of bias assessment based on adapted Cochrane checklist.
| Author | Selectionbias | Informationbias | Confounding |
|---|---|---|---|
| Al-Aubaidi (2012) [ | |||
| Bilal (2021) [ | |||
| Brandão (2010) [ | |||
| Ҫevik (2018) [ | |||
| Cha (2012) [ | |||
| Cossio (2014) [ | |||
| Endele (2010) [ | |||
| Falciglia (2014) [ | |||
| Fowles (1986) [ | |||
| Futami (1995) [ | |||
| Gutierrez-de la Iglesia (2015) [ | |||
| Jones (1971) [ | |||
| Klitscher (2009) [ | |||
| Koca (2017) [ | |||
| Massetti (2020) [ | |||
| Metaizeau (1993) [ | |||
| Monson (2009) [ | |||
| Shah (2020) [ | |||
| Stiefel (2001) [ | |||
| Tanagho (2015) [ | |||
| Tarallo (2013) [ | |||
| Tibone (1981) [ | |||
| Ugutmen (2010) [ | |||
| Walcher (2000) [ | |||
| Yallapragada (2020) [ | |||
| Zhang (2016) [ |
Scores: green = low risk, orange = moderate risk, red = high risk.
Part a: Overview of included articles, part b: MINORS criteria.
| (a) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Year | Fracture Classification | Injury Type | N | 1y FU | Mean Age in Years | Mean Follow-Up in Years (Range) | Outcome | ||||
| Al-Aubaidi [ | 2012 | Steele | all pt w/open physis treated with metaizeau | 16 | 16 | 12 (9–15) | 3.3 (1.3–6.3) | DASH | ||||
| Bilal [ | 2021 | >30° | >30°,intramedullary nailing (TEN) | 15 | 15 | 10.1 (6.4–15.8) | 2.1 (1.3–3) | Tan&Mahadev | ||||
| Brandão [ | 2010 | O’Brien | O’Brien type 3 | 28 | 26 | 8.6 (6–13) | 4.3 (1.7–10) | radiologic union, ROM | ||||
| Ҫevik [ | 2018 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 20 | 20 | 9.75 (4–13) | 2.9 (1.1–7) | ROM | ||||
| Cha [ | 2012 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 13 | 13 | 10.4 (6–13) | 3.5 (2.4–4.4) | flynn score | ||||
| Cossio [ | 2014 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 9 | 9 | 9.1 (6–12) | 2.2 (1–3) | Tibone | ||||
| Endele [ | 2010 | Judet | all RN# in a retrospective period | 54 | 42 | 8 (1-13) | 4 (0.5–11) | ROM | ||||
| Falciglia [ | 2014 | O’Brien | all RN# in a retrospective period | 24 | 24 | 7.1 (4.3–10.2) | 7.1 (3.2–12.1) | MEPS | ||||
| Fowles [ | 1986 | <20°, >20° | all RN# in a retrospective period | 23 | 17 | 9.1 (5–13) | 1.5 (0.7–2.8) | ROM | ||||
| Futami [ | 1995 | none | angulated RN# (not specified) | 10 | 10 | 9 (6–13) | u | Tibone and Stolz | ||||
| Gutierrez-de la Iglesia [ | 2015 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 51 | 0 | 8 (3–15) | 1.2 (0.7–3.3) | Tibone and Stolz, Ursei | ||||
| Jones [ | 1971 | 15–29°, 30–59°, 60–90° | all RN# in a retrospective period | 34 | 18 | 10 (5–13) | 5 (1–14) | Steele | ||||
| Klitscher [ | 2009 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 28 | 0 | 8 (5–11) | 2.7 (0.5–5.6) | MEPS, Metaizeau | ||||
| Koca [ | 2017 | Judet | Judet 3 | 11 | 11 | 7.7 (6–10) | 2.0 (1.7–2.7) | Leung/Peterson | ||||
| Massetti [ | 2020 | judet | Judet 3/4 | 20 | 0 | 7.8 (2–11) | 0.7–3.8 | MEPS | ||||
| Metaizeau [ | 1993 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 47 | 47 | 10.7 (5–13) | 4 (ns) | MEPS | ||||
| Monson [ | 2009 | Degrees | all RN# in a retrospecitve period | 6 | 6 | 9.5 (6–11) | 0.36 | Morrey, Metaizeau | ||||
| Shah [ | 2020 | Judet | Judet 4 | 10 | 10 | 8.6 (6–12) | 1 (0.8–1.3) | Steinberg, Rodriguez-Merchan | ||||
| Stiefel [ | 2001 | Judet | Judet 4 | 6 | 6 | 8.4 (7–10.8) | u (0.75–2.5) | ROM | ||||
| Tanagho [ | 2015 | Steele | isolated metaphyseal RN# >30° | 9 | 9 | 9.6 (u) | 1.6 (u) | Own rating system | ||||
| Tarallo [ | 2013 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 20 | 20 | 11 (6–16) | 3.5 (1.3–5.3) | MEPS, Metaizeau | ||||
| Tibone [ | 1981 | Degrees | all RN# in a retrospective period | 23 | 23 | 9.2 (4–14) | 3.15 (2.0–8.0) | ROM | ||||
| Ugutmen [ | 2010 | Judet | RN# with open growth plates | 16 | 16 | 8 (6–13) | 2 (1.5–3.3) | Metaizeau | ||||
| Walcher [ | 2000 | Judet | Judet 2/3, failed CR | 5 | 0 | 7 (u) | 3 (u) | ROM, own rating system | ||||
| Yallapragada [ | 2020 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 21 | 0 | 8 (u) | 0.4 (0.3–0.5) | OES, Metaizeau | ||||
| Zhang [ | 2016 | Judet | Judet 3/4 | 50 | 0 | 8.4 (5.6–13) | 2 (u) | MEPS | ||||
| 569 | 352 | 8.96 | 2.69 | |||||||||
| (b) | ||||||||||||
| Author | Year | MINORS Total | Aim | Consecutive Cases | End Points | Bias | Follow-Up | Lost to FU | Study Size | |||
| Al-Aubaidi [ | 2012 | 7 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Bilal [ | 2021 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Brandão [ | 2010 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Ҫevik [ | 2018 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Cha [ | 2012 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Cossio [ | 2014 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Endele [ | 2010 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Falciglia [ | 2014 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Fowles [ | 1986 | 8 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Futami [ | 1995 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Gutierrez-de la Iglesia [ | 2015 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Jones [ | 1971 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | |||
| Klitscher [ | 2009 | 9 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Koca [ | 2017 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Massetti [ | 2020 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Metaizeau [ | 1993 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Monson [ | 2009 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Shah [ | 2020 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Stiefel [ | 2001 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Tanagho [ | 2015 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Tarallo [ | 2013 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Tibone [ | 1981 | 9 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |||
| Ugutmen [ | 2010 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Walcher [ | 2000 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Yallapragada [ | 2020 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Zhang [ | 2016 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |||
u = unknown; RN# = radial neck fractures; ROM = range of motion; MEPS = Mayo Elbow Performance Score; OES = Oxford Elbow Score.
Data analysis of 352 pediatric patients who sustained a radial neck fracture and had at least 1 year follow-up.
| Fracture Angle | N (%) | Treatment Groups | N with Loss of Motion (% of Treatment) | N (% of Angulation Group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ≤30° | 25 (7.1) | CR | 1 (7.7) | 13 (52.0) |
| CRIF | 0 | 11 (44.0) | ||
| OR | 1 (100) | 1 (4.0) | ||
|
|
| |||
| 31–60° | 152 (43.2) | CR | 7 (63.6) | 11 (7.2) |
| CRIF | 12 (9.4) | 127 (83.6) | ||
| OR | 7 (50) | 14 (9.2) | ||
|
|
| |||
| >60° | 175 (49.7) | CR | 0 | 0 |
| CRIF | 33 (26.4) | 123 (70.3) | ||
| OR | 31 (59.6) | 52 (29.7) | ||
|
|
| |||
| >30° | 327 (92.9) | CR | 7 (63.6) *^ | 11 (3.4) |
| CRIF | 45 (18.0) *^ | 250 (76.5) | ||
| OR | 38 (55.1) | 66 (20.2) | ||
|
|
| |||
CR = closed reduction without fixation or immobilization only; CRIF = closed reduction internal fixation; OR = open reduction; CIMP = retrograde intramedullar fixation; Kw = percutaneous fixation with K-wire. N = number of patients; *: significant difference; NS: non-significant difference. $: In the group angulated 31–60, there is no significant difference between Kw and CIMP, p = 0.950. ^: In the >30 angulated patients, there is a significant difference between CR (without fixation) and CRIF (CIMP and Kw) fixation; p < 0.001. #: In the >30 angulated patients, there is no significant difference between IM fixation or Kw fixation, p = 0.007. @: In the >60 angulated patients, there is a significant difference between Kw and CIMP; p = 0.001.