Comparison of Two Minimally Invasive Osteosynthesis Techniques for Radial Head Fractures in Paediatric Patients

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11150%2F22%3A10445067" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11150/22:10445067 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00179906:_____/22:10445067

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=4a.Yz-HU_r" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=4a.Yz-HU_r</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Comparison of Two Minimally Invasive Osteosynthesis Techniques for Radial Head Fractures in Paediatric Patients

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Radial head fractures in paediatric patients account for 5-19% of all elbow injuries and approximately 1% of all fractures in children. Non-displaced fractures are treated with plaster cast fixation. If the fracture is displaced, we proceed to closed reduction, or to osteosynthesis in case of unstable fragments. If closed reduction fails, we opt for open reduction and osteosynthesis. The prospective randomised clinical study aims to compare the two methods of minimally invasive osteosynthesis using the pre-bent Kirschner wire or Prévot nail and to identify differences between them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The prospective randomised clinical study was conducted in 2015-2019. The final cohort included 32 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The patients in whom other osteosynthesis implants had been used or in whom open reduction had to be performed were excluded from the study. Also excluded were the patients with serious concomitant injuries of elbow. For patients included in the cohort, demographic data, precise evaluation of the displacement and location of the fracture as well as the duration of plaster cast fixation and osteosynthesis implants used were recorded. In the clinical part, the methods were compared based on the achievement of full range of motion in dependence on the degree of original displacement, use of osteosynthesis implant, and occurrence of early and delayed complications. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared. In both types of minimally invasive osteosynthesis, Métaizeau surgical technique was used. RESULTS: Based on the clinical trial criteria, 26 (81%) excellent, 4 (13%) good and 2 (6%) acceptable outcomes were achieved. In 3 cases the loss of rotation was up to 20°, in 1 case the loss of flexion was up to 10°. In one patient the loss of flexion was 15° and rotation up to 30°. In another patient the loss of rotation was up to 40°. The radiological assessment showed 14 (44%) excellent outcomes, 15 good (47%) and 3 (9%) acceptable outcomes. The statistical analysis of both the groups of the cohort using non-parametric tests revealed no statistically significant differences in individual demographic parameters. The comparisons of both types of osteosynthesis in dependence on the degree of displacement by non-parametric Fisher&apos;s exact test showed no statistically significant difference in the radiologie or clinical results. The only statistically significant difference was observed in the duration of metal implant placement. DISCUSSION: Comparable studies report excellent or good clinical outcomes in 80-95% of cases (1,13,16). In our cohort, excellent or good clinical outcomes were achieved in 30 patients (94%). In two patients, in whom Prévot nail was used, the outcomes were acceptable. Nonetheless, this fact did not result in any statistical significance when comparing the two methods separately or in comparisons based on the degree of displacement. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of the two methods of minimally invasive osteosynthesis revealed no statistically significant difference, namely not even when both the methods were compared based on the degree of displacement. When Kirschner wire is used, the possibility to remove the metal implant in the outpatient setting is considered to be an advantage. The drawback consists in potential penetration of the sharp Kirschner wire in the radiocapitellar joint, which we did not encounter when the second technique of osteosynthesis was used. The advantage of Prévot nail includes a lower risk of pin-tract infection.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Comparison of Two Minimally Invasive Osteosynthesis Techniques for Radial Head Fractures in Paediatric Patients

Popis výsledku anglicky

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Radial head fractures in paediatric patients account for 5-19% of all elbow injuries and approximately 1% of all fractures in children. Non-displaced fractures are treated with plaster cast fixation. If the fracture is displaced, we proceed to closed reduction, or to osteosynthesis in case of unstable fragments. If closed reduction fails, we opt for open reduction and osteosynthesis. The prospective randomised clinical study aims to compare the two methods of minimally invasive osteosynthesis using the pre-bent Kirschner wire or Prévot nail and to identify differences between them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The prospective randomised clinical study was conducted in 2015-2019. The final cohort included 32 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The patients in whom other osteosynthesis implants had been used or in whom open reduction had to be performed were excluded from the study. Also excluded were the patients with serious concomitant injuries of elbow. For patients included in the cohort, demographic data, precise evaluation of the displacement and location of the fracture as well as the duration of plaster cast fixation and osteosynthesis implants used were recorded. In the clinical part, the methods were compared based on the achievement of full range of motion in dependence on the degree of original displacement, use of osteosynthesis implant, and occurrence of early and delayed complications. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared. In both types of minimally invasive osteosynthesis, Métaizeau surgical technique was used. RESULTS: Based on the clinical trial criteria, 26 (81%) excellent, 4 (13%) good and 2 (6%) acceptable outcomes were achieved. In 3 cases the loss of rotation was up to 20°, in 1 case the loss of flexion was up to 10°. In one patient the loss of flexion was 15° and rotation up to 30°. In another patient the loss of rotation was up to 40°. The radiological assessment showed 14 (44%) excellent outcomes, 15 good (47%) and 3 (9%) acceptable outcomes. The statistical analysis of both the groups of the cohort using non-parametric tests revealed no statistically significant differences in individual demographic parameters. The comparisons of both types of osteosynthesis in dependence on the degree of displacement by non-parametric Fisher&apos;s exact test showed no statistically significant difference in the radiologie or clinical results. The only statistically significant difference was observed in the duration of metal implant placement. DISCUSSION: Comparable studies report excellent or good clinical outcomes in 80-95% of cases (1,13,16). In our cohort, excellent or good clinical outcomes were achieved in 30 patients (94%). In two patients, in whom Prévot nail was used, the outcomes were acceptable. Nonetheless, this fact did not result in any statistical significance when comparing the two methods separately or in comparisons based on the degree of displacement. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison of the two methods of minimally invasive osteosynthesis revealed no statistically significant difference, namely not even when both the methods were compared based on the degree of displacement. When Kirschner wire is used, the possibility to remove the metal implant in the outpatient setting is considered to be an advantage. The drawback consists in potential penetration of the sharp Kirschner wire in the radiocapitellar joint, which we did not encounter when the second technique of osteosynthesis was used. The advantage of Prévot nail includes a lower risk of pin-tract infection.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30211 - Orthopaedics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Acta Chirurgiae Orthopaedicae et Traumatologiae Čechoslovaca

ISSN

0001-5415

e-ISSN

2570-981X

Svazek periodika

89

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

7

Strana od-do

213-219

Kód UT WoS článku

000817859300007

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85134425588