principles of management pediatric fractures

Post on 07-Jan-2016

51 Views

Category:

Documents

0 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. Principles of management Pediatric Fractures. Objectives. Statistics about fractures in children How children’s bones are different Outline principles of management Point out specific precautions Acknowledgement and recommendation Lynn T Staheli. introduction. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Principles of managementPediatric Fractures

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Objectives

• Statistics about fractures in children• How children’s bones are different• Outline principles of management• Point out specific precautions

Acknowledgement and recommendation Lynn T Staheli

introduction

• In Middle East ~60% of population are < 20 yrs.

• Fractures account for ~15% of all injuries in children.

• Different from adult fractures• Vary in various age groups

( Infants, children, adolescents )

Statistics

• ~ 50% of boys and 25% of girls, expected to have a fracture during childhood.

• Boys > girls• Rate increases with age.

Mizulta, 1987

Statistics

• ~ 50% of boys and 25% of girls, expected to have a fracture during childhood.

• Boys > girls• Rate increases with age.

• Physeal injuries with age.

Mizulta, 1987

Statistics

Most frequent sites(sample of 923 children, Mizulta, 1987)

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Growth plate.• Bone.• Cartilage.• Periosteum.• Ligaments.• Age-related• physiology

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Growth plate:

– In infants, GP is stronger than bone increased diaphyseal fractures– Provides perfect remodeling power.– Injury of growth plate causes deformity.– A fracture might lead to overgrowth.

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Bone:

– Increased collagen: bone ratio - lowers modulus of elasticity

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Bone:

– Increased collagen: bone ratio - lowers modulus of elasticity– Increased cancellous bone - reduces tensile strength - reduces tendency of fracture to propagate less comminuted fractures– Bone fails on both tension and compression - commonly seen “buckle” fracture

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Cartilage:

– Increased ratio of cartilage to bone - better resilience - difficult x-ray evaluation - size of articular fragment often under-estimated

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Periosteum:

– Metabolically active• more callus, rapid union, increased remodeling

– Thickness and strength• Intact periosteal hinge affects fracture pattern• May aid reduction

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Age related fracture pattern:

– Infants: diaphyseal fractures– Children: metaphyseal fractures– Adolescents: epiphyseal injuries

Why are children’s fractures different?

Children have different physiology and anatomy

• Physiology

– Better blood supply rare incidence of delayed and non-union

Physeal injuries

• Account for ~25% of all children’s fractures.• More in boys.• More in upper limb.• Most heal well rapidly with good remodeling.• Growth may be affected.

Physeal injuriesClassification: Salter-Harris, Peterson, Ogden

Physeal injuries

• Less than 1% cause physeal bridging affecting growth.– Small bridges (<10%) may lyse spontaneously.– Central bridges more likely to lyse.– Peripheral bridges more likely to cause deformity

– Avoid injury to physis during fixation.– Monitor growth over a long period.– Image suspected physeal bar (CT, MRI)

The power of remodeling

• Tremendous power of remodeling• Can accept more angulation and displacement• Rotational mal-alignment ?does not remodel

The power of remodeling

Factors affecting remodeling potential

• Years of remaining growth – most important factor

• Position in the bone – the nearer to physis the better

• Plane of motion – greatest in sagittal, the frontal, and least for transverse

plane

• Physeal status – if damaged, less potential for correction

• Growth potential of adjacent physis e.g. upper humerus better than lower humerus

The power of remodeling

Factors affecting remodeling potential

• Growth potential of adjacent physis e.g. upper humerus better than lower

humerus

Indications for operative fixation

• Open fractures• Displaced intra articular fractures

( Salter-Harris III-IV )

• fractures with vascular injury• ? Compartment syndrome• Fractures not reduced by closed reduction

( soft tissue interposition, button-holing of periosteum )

• If reduction could be only maintained in an abnormal position

Indications for operative fixation

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• K- wires could be replaced by absorbable rods

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• K- wires could be replaced by absorbable rods

Preoperative immediate 6 months 12 months

Hope et al , JBJS 73B(6) ,1991

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws• Plates – multiple trauma

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws• Plates – multiple trauma• IMN - adolescents only (injury to growth)

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws• Plates – multiple trauma• IMN - adolescents• Ex-fix – usually in open fractures

Methods of fixation

• Casting - still the commonest• K-wires

– most commonly used– Metaphyseal fractures

• Intramedullary wires, elastic nails– Very useful– Diaphyseal fractures

• Screws• Plates – multiple trauma• IMN - adolescents• Ex-fix

Combination

Fixation and stability

• Fixation methods provide varying degrees of stability.

• Ideal fixation should provide adequate stability and allow normal flexibility.

• Often combination methods are best.

Complications

• Ma-lunion is not usually a problem ( except cubitus varus )• Non-union is hardly seen ( except in the lateral condyle )• Growth disturbance – epiphyseal damage• Vascular – volkmann’s ischemia• Infection - rare

Beware!

Non-accidental injuries

Beware!

Non-accidental injuries• ?Multiple• At various levels of healing• Unclear history – mismatching with injury• Circumstantial evidence

Beware!

Non-accidental injuries• Circumstantial evidence

• Soft tissue injuries - bruising, burns• Intraabdominal injuries• Intracranial injuries• Delay in seeking treatment

Beware!

Non-accidental injuries• Specific pattern

– Posterior ribs– Skull

Beware!Non-accidental injuries

• Specific pattern– Corner fractures (traction & rotation)

Beware!Non-accidental injuries

• Specific pattern– Bucket handle fractures (traction & rotation)

Beware!

Non-accidental injuries• Specific pattern

– Femur shaft fracture• <1 year of age ( 60-70% non accidental)• Transverse fracture

– Humeral shaft fracture <3 years of age– Sternal fractures

Beware!

Malignant tumours

• Can present as injury.• History of trauma usual.

•12 y old girl• History of trauma• mild tenderness• Periosteal reaction

• 2m later, still tender

• Ewings sarcoma

Special considerations

During resuscitation

summaryChildren’s bones are different

summary

• About 60% of population in ME are children!• Fractures in children are common.• Children’s bones are different• Outline principles of management.• Specific treatment plans (combinations possible)• Specific precautions.• Beware

– Non-accidental trauma– Malignant tumors

AO Courses, Riyadh 1-5 May 2005

top related