Background:The current controversy regarding the management of fractures of the lateral condyle of the humerus presenting between 3 to 12 weeks prompted us to evaluate our results of open reduction and internal fixation of such fractures.Patients and Methods:Twenty-one patients operated between March 1995 and February 2001 qualified for this study. Five patients presented between 3–4 weeks, nine between 5–8 weeks and seven between 9–12 weeks post injury. Ten fractures were classified as stage II and eleven as stage III (Jacob et al. criteria). The mean age was 8 years (range: 4–14 years). All patients underwent surgery (open reduction and internal fixation with K-wires/screw, with or without bone grafting). The results were assessed by the modified criteria of Agarwal et al. after an average follow-up of 2.3 years.Results:Excellent to good results were observed in all the five patients presenting at 3–4 weeks post injury. In the patients presenting at 5–8 weeks, the results were excellent in one, good in four, fair in three, and poor in one patient. The fracture united in all cases; however, malunion was observed in four patients. The fractures that were operated at 9–12 weeks showed good results in one case, fair result in three cases, and poor result in three cases. Avascular necrosis of the lateral condyle in one patient, premature fusion in two patients, pin tract infection in three patients, and gross restriction of elbow movements in three patients were the major complications in this group. Accurate reduction was difficult as a result of new bone formation and remodeling at the fracture surfaces. Multiple incisions over the common extensor aponeurosis and bone graft supplementation were helpful for achieving acceptable reduction.Conclusion:Open reduction and internal fixation is recommended in all cases of displaced fractures of the lateral condyle of the humerus presenting at up to 12 weeks post injury. However, the results become poorer with increase in duration after injury and the grade of displacement. To avoid complications it is important to carry out careful dissection of the soft tissue attachments and to mobilize the fragment without the use of force.
Both conservative and operative forms of treatment have been recommended for patients with a 'floating shoulder'. We compared the results of conservative and operative treatment in 25 patients with this injury and investigated the use of the glenopolar angle (GPA) as an indicator of the functional outcome. A total of 13 patients (ten male and three female; mean age 32.5 years (24.7 to 40.4)) were treated conservatively and 12 patients (ten male and two female; mean age 33.67 years (24.6 to 42.7)) were treated operatively by fixation of the clavicular fracture alone. Outcome was assessed using the Herscovici score, which was also related to changes in the GPA at one year post-operatively. The mean Herscovici score was significantly better three months and two years after the injury in the operative group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). There was a negative correlation between the change in GPA and the Herscovici score at two years follow-up in both the conservative and operative groups, but neither were statistically significant (r = -0.295 and r = -0.19, respectively). There was a significant difference between the pre- and post-operative GPA in the operative group (p = 0.017). When compared with conservative treatment, fixation of the clavicle alone gives better results in the treatment of patients with a floating shoulder. The GPA changes significantly with fixation of clavicle alone but there is no significant correlation between the pre-injury GPA and the final clinical outcome in these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.