1 / 49

Principles of management Pediatric Fractures

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.

mullane
Download Presentation

Principles of management Pediatric Fractures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Principles of managementPediatric Fractures

  2. 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

  3. 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 )

  4. Statistics • ~ 50% of boys and 25% of girls, expected to have a fracture during childhood. • Boys > girls • Rate increases with age. Mizulta, 1987

  5. 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

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

  7. Why are children’s fractures different? Children have different physiology and anatomy • Growth plate. • Bone. • Cartilage. • Periosteum. • Ligaments. • Age-related • physiology

  8. 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.

  9. Why are children’s fractures different? Children have different physiology and anatomy • Bone: • Increased collagen: bone ratio - lowers modulus of elasticity

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. Why are children’s fractures different? Children have different physiology and anatomy • Physiology • Better blood supply rare incidence of delayed and non-union

  15. 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.

  16. Physeal injuries Classification: Salter-Harris, Peterson, Ogden

  17. 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)

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

  19. 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

  20. The power of remodeling Factors affecting remodeling potential • Growth potential of adjacent physis e.g. upper humerus better than lower humerus

  21. 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

  22. Indications for operative fixation

  23. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest

  24. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest • K-wires • most commonly used • Metaphyseal fractures

  25. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest • K-wires • most commonly used • Metaphyseal fractures • K- wires could be replaced by absorbable rods

  26. 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

  27. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest • K-wires • most commonly used • Metaphyseal fractures • Intramedullary wires, elastic nails • Very useful • Diaphyseal fractures

  28. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest • K-wires • most commonly used • Metaphyseal fractures • Intramedullary wires, elastic nails • Very useful • Diaphyseal fractures • Screws

  29. Methods of fixation • Casting - still the commonest • K-wires • most commonly used • Metaphyseal fractures • Intramedullary wires, elastic nails • Very useful • Diaphyseal fractures • Screws

  30. 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

  31. 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)

  32. 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

  33. 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

  34. 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.

  35. 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

  36. Beware! Non-accidental injuries

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

  38. Beware! Non-accidental injuries • Circumstantial evidence • Soft tissue injuries - bruising, burns • Intraabdominal injuries • Intracranial injuries • Delay in seeking treatment

  39. Beware! Non-accidental injuries • Specific pattern • Posterior ribs • Skull

  40. Beware! Non-accidental injuries • Specific pattern • Corner fractures (traction & rotation)

  41. Beware! Non-accidental injuries • Specific pattern • Bucket handle fractures (traction & rotation)

  42. 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

  43. 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

  44. Special considerations During resuscitation

  45. summary Children’s bones are different

  46. 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

  47. Thank You

More Related