Articles Vol. 65 No. CĐ 1 - Liên chi hội Phẫu thuật bàn tay 12/03/2024

26. RESULTS OF CONSERVATIVE VERSUS SURGICAL TREATMENT OF DISTAL THIRD FOREARM FRACTURE IN CHILDREN AT HOSPITAL FOR TRAUMATOLOGY AND ORTHOPAEDICS OF HO CHI MINH CITY

Vo Quang Dinh Nam1,2, Truong Phuoc Nhan3,4
1 Hospital for Traumatology and Orthopaedics
2 Bệnh viện Chấn thương Chỉnh hình
3 Binh Duong Rehabilitation Hospital
4 Bệnh viện Phục hồi Chức năng Bình Dương
Corresponding author: namvqd@hotmail.com
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v65iCD1.986
17 Views
12 Downloads
Keywords
Distal third forearm fracture, surgery, conservation.
Abstract

Background: Distal third fracture is the most common location. Treatments are conservative or surgical; improper indication will leave deformities that will affect the child’s pronation and supination function later on.

Purposes: To compare the results of conservative and surgical treatment. Methods: This cross-sectional retrospective study was in patients ≤ 12 years old, treated at HTO for 5 years from March 2013 - April 2017.

Results: The average follow-up time of our study is 43.3 ± 12.3 months, the shortest is 28 months, the longest is 78 months. According to Daruwalla criteria, surgical results in 100% bone healing and good functions, and conservative results in 1 case of limited pronation of the hand of 22˚; however, it was compensated by shoulder movement and did not require further intervention. “Very satisfied” conservation was statistically significantly higher than the surgery group (76.7% vs 43.3%, p=0.011).

Conclusion: The bone healing rate of both treatment methods is high. Depending on the age, fracture type, fracture line, and displacement of each case as well as respecting the ability to remodel, choose the appropriate treatment method to give the best results.

References
[1]
Hassan FO, Hand dominance and the gender in Google Scholar
[2]
forearm fractures in children; Strat Traum Limb Google Scholar
[3]
Licon, 3, pp.101-103, 2008. Google Scholar
[4]
Landin LA, Epidemiology of children’s fractures, Google Scholar
[5]
J Pediatr Orthop B, 6, pp.79-83, 1997. Google Scholar
[6]
Outtara O, Result of treatment of forearm fractures Google Scholar
[7]
in children, Mali Med, 22(3), pp.43-46, 2007. Google Scholar
[8]
Vũ Huyền Trinh, Điều trị gãy hai xương cẳng Google Scholar
[9]
tay trẻ em bằng phương pháp xuyên đinh nội tủy Google Scholar
[10]
dưới màng tăng sáng, Luận văn chuyên khoa cấp Google Scholar
[11]
II, Đại học Y dược TP.HCM, tr.45-87, 2002 Google Scholar
[12]
Qidwai S, Treatment of diaphyseal forearm Google Scholar
[13]
fractures in children by intramedullary Kirschner Google Scholar
[14]
wire, J Trauma, Feb; 50(2) pp.303-7, 2001. Google Scholar
[15]
Choi KY et al., Percutaneous Kirschner-wire Google Scholar
[16]
pinning for severely dispplaced distal radial Google Scholar
[17]
fractures in children, The Journal of Bone and Google Scholar
[18]
Joint Surgery, vol 77-B (5), Sep, pp.797-801, Google Scholar
[19]
Chess DG, Hyndman JC, Leahey JL et al., Short Google Scholar
[20]
arm plaster cast for distal pediatric forearm Google Scholar
[21]
fractures, J. Pediatr Orthop, 14, pp.211-213, Google Scholar
[22]
Maccagnano G, Failure Predictor Factors of Google Scholar
[23]
Conservative Treatment in Pediatric Forearm Google Scholar
[24]
Fractures, BioMed Research International, Google Scholar
[25]
Volume 2018. Google Scholar
[26]
Lascombes P, Metaizeau JP et al., Elastic stable Google Scholar
[27]
intramedullary nailing in forearm shaft fractures Google Scholar
[28]
in children: 85 cases, J. Pediatr Orthop, 10(2): Google Scholar
[29]
pp.167-71, 1990. Google Scholar
[30]
Kim BS, Lee YS, Park SY et al., Flexible Google Scholar
[31]
intramedullary nailing of forearm fractures at Google Scholar
[32]
the distal mrtadiaphyseal jonction in adolescent, Google Scholar
[33]
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery, 9(1), pp.102- Google Scholar
[34]
, 2017. Google Scholar