Dataset Information

Close Reduction Technique for Severely Displaced Radial Neck Fractures in Children.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Radial neck fractures account for 5-10% of paediatric elbow trauma. Radial neck fractures have been classified by Judet into five types (I-IVb). There is a global agreement to reduce radial neck fractures with angulation more than 30° (Type III, IVa and IVb). Various maneuvers have been described but none of them uniformly achieved complete reduction in severely displaced radial neck fractures (Type IVa and Type IVb Judet). In this case series, we are presenting our experience with close reduction of ten severely displaced paediatric radial neck fractures to achieve complete anatomical reduction.

Methods

We attempted close reduction in ten consecutive children with average age of 8.59 ± 1.68 years (range, 6-12 years) who presented with severely displaced radial neck fracture (Type IVa and IVb Judet). There were five girls. All patients had close injuries and presented to us within 24-48 h. One of the patients had associated undisplaced lateral condyle fracture. We have excluded two patients with associated elbow dislocation. Close reduction was performed within 48 h of initial injury.

Results

We were able to obtain complete anatomical reduction in all of our patients with this technique. None of the patients required fixation of fracture. At 1 year of follow-up, (12 ± 2.07 months, range 9-16 months) all patients demonstrated almost full range of elbow and forearm motion. Final radiographs revealed complete union without any evidence of avascular necrosis.

Conclusion

This technique offers an option of close reduction for the most severely displaced radial neck fractures, which were otherwise being treated by surgical intervention.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s43465-020-00168-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

SUBMITTER: Shah MM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7851243 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:It remains unclear whether volar locked plating (VLP) yields a better functional outcome than closed reduction and casting (CRC) for elderly patients with an acute, displaced distal radial fracture. Our purpose was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of VLP and CRC for elderly patients (age, ?60 years). METHODS:Multiple databases, including MEDLINE, were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating outcomes following distal radial fracture treatment. Raw data were obtained for studies that included patients of all ages, and the elderly subgroup was included for analysis. The primary outcome was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at ?1 year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the 3-month DASH score, range of motion, final radiographic alignment, and complications. Effect sizes for the comparison of each outcome between groups were pooled across studies using random-effects models with the inverse variance weighting method. Changes in DASH score were compared with a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimate of 10 to assess clinical relevance. RESULTS:Of 2,152 screened articles, 6 were included. Demographics were similar for the 274 VLP and 287 CRC patients. DASH scores were significantly better following VLP than CRC at the time of final follow-up (12 to 24 months postoperatively; score difference, -5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.7 to -3.1) and at 3 months (-8.9; 95% CI, -13.0 to -4.8). VLP yielded significantly better palmar tilt, radial inclination, and supination, with no differences in ulnar variance, flexion-extension, pronation, or total complication rates. CONCLUSIONS:Functional outcome was significantly better following VLP than CRC 3 months into the treatment of acute, displaced distal radial fractures in an elderly population and up to 2 years after injury. However, the observed differences in the final DASH score did not exceed published estimates of the MCID, suggesting that clinical outcomes are similar for both treatment options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.