Percutanous Crossed Pinning Versus Two Lateral Pinning for Treating Supracondylar Humeral Fracture in Children: Comparative Study | ||
| Kirkuk Journal of Medical Sciences | ||
| Article 8, Volume 8, Issue 1, December 2020, Pages 64-77 PDF (2.02 M) | ||
| DOI: 10.32894/kjms.2020.169357 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Muhammed Kamal Othman; Sherwan Hamawand | ||
| Department of Orthopaedics and Fractures, Medical College, Hawler Medical University | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objectives: The study done to identify the advantage and disadvantage of two pinning types used for supracondylar fracture in children. The Baumann`s angle difference, ulnar nerve injury incidence and elbow flexion-extension loss. Methods: Conducting a prospective randomized controlled study on 30 patients with extension type III supracondylar fracture from 1st January 2018 to 1st January 2019 operated by medaial-lateral pinning (n=15) or two lateral pinning (n=15). Results: 30 patients with mean age of 6.73 years were included in the study. The mean follow-up period was 2.75 months. The Baumann`s angle mean difference between normal and injured elbow in crossed pinning and two lateral pinning was 5.46 and 4.96 and the difference was statistically not signoficant (p=0.58).The mean flexion-extension loss in crossed pinning was 8.3 and 6.25 degrees, in two lateral pinning was 11.25 and 7 degrees respectively. Mean difference of carrying angle in crossed pinning was 2.1 degrees; in two lateral pinning was 2.73 degrees. The differences between two groups were not statistically significant (p=0.65). Two iatrogenic ulnar nerve damage developed in crossed pinning while in two lateral pinning, no incidence of nerve damage seen. This difference also was not significant (p=0.14). Conclusion: From both fixation types, we found that there isn`t statistical difference in terms of clinical outcomes. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Supracondylar fracture; Crossed and lateral pinning; Ulnar nerve injury; Baumann`s angle; Flexion-extension loss; Trochlear osteonecrosis | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 138 PDF Download: 147 |
||