| Literature DB >> 36238148 |
Susan T Mahan1,2, Patricia E Miller1, Jiwoo Park1, Nicholas Sullivan1, Carley Vuillermin1,2.
Abstract
Background: Challenges remain in determining which displaced supracondylar humerus fractures are safe to postpone surgical treatment until daylight hours. The purpose of this study is to determine which characteristics can be identified to guide the timing of treatment of supracondylar humerus fractures.Entities:
Keywords: Supracondylar humerus fracture; displaced elbow fracture; pediatric elbow fracture
Year: 2022 PMID: 36238148 PMCID: PMC9550999 DOI: 10.1177/18632521221119540
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Child Orthop ISSN: 1863-2521 Impact factor: 1.917
Radiographic measurements obtained using the best available lateral and AP radiographic images taken of the patient in the emergency room on night of presentation.
| Code | Image used to measure | Description of measurement | Metric |
|---|---|---|---|
| L1 | Best lateral view | The distance from the anterior edge of the shaft to the anterior edge of the fracture fragment | In millimeters |
| L2 | Best lateral view | The distance from the posterior edge of the shaft to the posterior edge of the fracture fragment | In millimeters |
| L3 | Best lateral view | Diameter of the proximal (shaft) fragment at the fracture edge | In millimeters |
| L4 | Best lateral view | Diameter of the distal fragment at the fracture edge | In millimeters |
| L5 | Best lateral view | Midshaft bone diameter | In millimeters |
| L6 | Best lateral view | Distance of capitellum from anterior humeral line | In millimeters |
| L7 | Best lateral view | Distance from anterior humeral “spike” to skin edge | In millimeters |
| L8 | Best lateral view | Whether or not the distal fragment was “off ended”, that is, whether both the anterior and posterior cortices of the distal fragment lie behind the posterior cortex of the proximal shaft | Categorical |
| AP1 | Best AP view | The distance from the medial edge of the shaft to the medial edge of the fracture fragment | In millimeters |
| AP2 | Best AP view | The distance from the lateral edge of the shaft to the lateral edge of the fracture fragment | In millimeters |
| AP3 | Best AP view | Diameter of the proximal (shaft) fragment at the fracture edge | In millimeters |
| AP4 | Best AP view | The diameter of the distal fragment at the fracture edge | In millimeters |
| G | Both AP and lateral views | Each fracture was assessed for a global category based on one of the following: (1) posteromedial, (2) posterolateral, (3) not significantly displaced on AP view, (4) directly posterior, (5) rotational not reflected above, (6) other than as above, or (7) cannot tell or radiographs unavailable | categorical |
| MAPL | Both AP and lateral views | Maximum of L1, L2, AP1, AP2 | In millimeters |
AP: anterior–posterior; MAPL: maximum displacement on the anterior posterior or lateral view.
Figure 1.The maximum of the anterior-posterior or lateral (MAPL) measurement is obtained by measuring the maximum displacement of the most displaced fracture cortex on the anterior–posterior (AP) view as well as the maximum displacement of the most displaced fracture cortex on the lateral view. Then the larger of the two displacement is the MAPL. (a) Lateral and (b) AP are images from one patient; in this case the larger displacement is on the AP view and the MAPL is 23 mm. (c) Lateral and (d) AP are images from a second patient; in this case the larger displacement is also on the AP view and the MAPL is 21 mm. (e) Lateral and (f) AP are images from a third patient; in this case the larger displacement is on the lateral view and the MAPL is 35 mm. (g) Lateral and (h) AP are images from a fourth patient; in this case the larger displacement is on the lateral view and the MAPL is 4 mm.
Patient and injury characteristics for all subjects and stratified by treatment timing.
| Characteristic | All injuries
( | Early ( | Delayed |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freq. | (%) | Freq. | (%) | Freq. | (%) | ||
| Age at injury (years; mean (SD)) | 6.3 | (2.0) | 6.4 | (1.7) | 6.2 | (2.2) | 0.34 |
| Sex (% male) | 106 | (47%) | 36 | (46%) | 70 | (48%) | 0.83 |
| Ethnicity | |||||||
| Hispanic | 12 | (5%) | 7 | (9%) | 5 | (3%) | 0.96 |
| Not Hispanic | 174 | (77%) | 57 | (73%) | 117 | (80%) | |
| Unknown/not reported | 39 | (17%) | 14 | (18%) | 25 | (17%) | |
| Race | 0.19 | ||||||
| White | 144 | (64%) | 49 | (63%) | 95 | (65%) | |
| Black/African American | 10 | (4%) | 2 | (3%) | 8 | (5%) | |
| Asian | 22 | (10%) | 5 | (6%) | 17 | (12%) | |
| Native Alaskan | 1 | (0%) | 0 | (0%) | 1 | (1%) | |
| Other/unknown | 48 | (21%) | 22 | (28%) | 26 | (18%) | |
| Injury characteristics | |||||||
| Injured side (% right) | 142 | (63%) | 51 | (65%) | 91 | (62%) | 0.61 |
| Swelling | 224 | (99.6%) | 78 | (100%) | 146 | (99%) | 0.99 |
| Puckering | 13 | (6%) | 9 | (12%) | 4 | (3%) | 0.01 |
| Nerve injury | 28 | (12%) | 23 | (29%) | 5 | (3%) | < 0.001 |
| Median only | 18 | (62%) | 17 | (59%) | 1 | (10%) | |
| Radial only | 7 | (25%) | 4 | (14%) | 3 | (30%) | |
| Ulnar only | 1 | (4%) | 0 | (0%) | 1 | (10%) | |
| More than one nerve | 2 | (7%) | 2 | (7%) | 0 | (0%) | |
SD: standard deviation.
Radiographic characteristics by treatment timing.
| Radiographic characteristic | Early ( | Delayed ( |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | (SD) | Mean | (SD) | ||
| MAPL: Max (L1, L2, AP1, AP2) | 22.2 | (9.9) | 14.3 | (8.0) | <0.001 |
| L1 | 17.6 | (9.6) | 12 | (7.2) | <0.001 |
| L1/L5 | 1.3 | (0.6) | 0.9 | (0.5) | <0.001 |
| L1 + L2 | 33 | (18.8) | 19.4 | (12.7) | <0.001 |
| (L1 + L2)/L5 | 2.4 | (1.3) | 1.4 | (0.9) | <0.001 |
| L1 + L2 + AP1 + AP2 | 62.4 | (31.2) | 37.4 | (26.0) | <0.001 |
| (L1 + L2 + AP1 + AP2)/L5 | 4.6 | (2.3) | 2.8 | (1.8) | <0.001 |
| L5 | 13.7 | (2.2) | 13.5 | (2.1) | 0.55 |
| L3/L4 | 1.2 | (0.4) | 1.2 | (0.4) | 0.98 |
| ABS(1 L3/L4) | 0.3 | (0.3) | 0.3 | (0.3) | 0.51 |
| AP3/AP4 | 1.1 | (0.5) | 1.1 | (0.2) | 0.19 |
| ABS(1-AP3/AP4) | 0.2 | (0.5) | 0.1 | (0.2) | 0.10 |
| L6 | 21.3 | (12.0) | 13.9 | (9.4) | <0.001 |
| L7 | 21 | (11.5) | 28.5 | (10.0) | <0.001 |
| L8 ( | <0.001 | ||||
| Yes | 40 | (53%) | 25 | (17%) | |
| No | 26 | (35%) | 103 | (71%) | |
| Borderline | 9 | (12%) | 17 | (12%) | |
| GLOBAL | 0.07 | ||||
| Posteromedial | 24 | (31%) | 33 | (22%) | |
| Posterolateral | 31 | (40%) | 45 | (31%) | |
| Not significantly displaced on AP view | 0 | (0%) | 10 | (7%) | |
| Directly posterior | 17 | (22%) | 50 | (34%) | |
| Cannot tell/X-ray unavailable | 5 | (6%) | 9 | (6%) | |
| Rotational | 1 | (1%) | 0 | (0%) | |
SD: standard deviation; MAPL: maximum displacement on the anterior–posterior or lateral view; AP: anterior–posterior.
Treatment and outcome characteristics by treatment timing groups.
| Characteristic | Early | Delayed |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | (SD) | Mean | (SD) | ||
| Time to treatment (h; mean (SD)) | 3.1 | (1.7) | 11.8 | (3.1) | |
| Open reduction | 9 | (12%) | 4 | (3%) | 0.01 |
| On-call surgeon experience level | <0.001 | ||||
| 0–4 years | 8 | (10%) | 9 | (6%) | |
| 5–9 years | 36 | (46%) | 46 | (31%) | |
| 10–14 years | 28 | (36%) | 50 | (34%) | |
| 15+ years | 6 | (8%) | 42 | (29%) | |
| Complication (at least 1) | 8 | (10%) | 6 | (4%) | 0.08 |
| Loss of reduction | 7 | (9%) | 5 | (3%) | 0.09 |
| Infection | 0 | (0%) | 1 | (1%) | >0.99 |
| Return to OR | 1 | (2%) | 0 | (0%) | >0.99 |
| New nerve issue | 1 | (1%) | 0 | (0%) | >0.99 |
| Nerve injury | 23 | (29%) | 5 | (3%) | |
| Timing of nerve recovery
( | 0.36 | ||||
| Immediately postoperative | 2 | (9%) | 2 | (40%) | |
| Prior to hospital discharge | 2 | (9%) | 0 | (0%) | |
| Post hospital discharge, but <1 month FU | 4 | (17%) | 1 | (20%) | |
| ≥1 month but <3 month FU | 5 | (22%) | 1 | (20%) | |
| ≥3 month FU | 6 | (26%) | 1 | (20%) | |
| Lost to FU, recovery not recorded | 4 | (17%) | 0 | (0%) | |
SD: standard deviation; OR: odds ratios; FU: follow-up.
Figure 2.Study data flow through treatment algorithm. Data were analyzed with classification and regression tree (CART) analysis based on when our group of pediatric orthopedic surgeons chose to treat the patients in the cohort, based on clinical and radiographic characteristics (early = overnight, delayed = postponed until the next day). Complication rates are also presented but were not used to create this algorithm.
Figure 3.Proposed treatment timing for SCHFx based on vascular status, nerve injury, and maximal displacement. This treatment timing algorithm is based on the combined “best practices” of our large pediatric orthopedic group. “Treat Early” means that surgery is recommended in the evening or overnight. “Delay Treatment” means that most of these injuries are safe to postpone for treatment the next day.