Evaluation of the role of pin fixation versus collar and cuff immobilisation in supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children

Abstract

Long term results of children with supracondylar humeral fractures treated with manipulation and strapping and manipulation followed by pin fixation were evaluated. Forty patients were regarded as Gartland type II injuries. 33 of these were treated with closed reduction and collar and cuff immobilisation and 7 with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning. Two cases of cubitus varus were reported one from each treatment modality Forty-four patients were included as Gartland type III injuries. Of these 14 were treated with closed reduction and collar and cuff immobilisation, 25 with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning and five with open reduction and pinning. There were two cases of cubitus varus and one case of cubitus valgus following pin fixation. In addition one case of extension lag and one significant ulnar nerve neurapraxia was recorded following pin fixation. One case of cubitus varus was seen following manipulation and collar and cuff treatment. There was no statistical difference between either treatment modality in terms of predicting a better outcome ( p>0.05). We conclude that pin fixation has no advantages over simple immobilisation in certain Gartland II and III type injuries. Although pin fixation is beneficial in unstable injuries collar and cuff immobilisation continues to have an important role in the treatment of stable supracondylar fractures.