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
• 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 injuries
Classification: 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              i o n
                               a t
•   Ex-fix                bi n
                        o m
                       C
            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
        summary
Children’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