Affiliation:
1. Kursk State Medical University;
Regional Children’s Clinical Hospital
2. Kursk State Medical University
3. A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry
Abstract
Background: The need to minimize the immobilization of the elbow joint in multifragmental fractures of the distal metaepiphysis of the humerus is confirmed by a number of factors, including the complexity of its anatomical structure, the uniqueness of biomechanics, as well as the limited ability of hyaline cartilage to regenerate. The restoration of the motor potential of the limb in multifragmentary fractures of the distal metaepiphysis of the humerus determines the priority of the treatment technique, which allows the patient to return to his usual lifestyle in the near future.Objective: Demonstration of the effectiveness of percutaneous spinal osteosynthesis with wires in fractures of distal metaepiphysis of the humerus in adolescent children.Clinical cases: This paper describes two clinical cases in adolescent children with multifragmentary fractures (open and closed) of the distal part of humerus (12В and 13С according to the AO classification). In both cases, the treatment consisted of sequential application of skeletal traction, for fragments traction and their mobility increase, then closed reposition of fragments under the control of electron-optical converter with metal osteosynthesis with wires. Moreover, taking into consideration the U- and T-shape nature of the fractures, the first stage of reposition included stabilization and fixation of the distal fragments to each other and then to the proximal fragment.Conclusion: In our opinion, it is the combination of traditional methods of treatment (application of skeletal traction system), modern technologies (EOC control), alternative (atypical) options for using metal structures that allow achieving good functional treatment results in this category of patients.
Publisher
Scientific Research Institute - Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No 1
Reference14 articles.
1. Naumenko LYu. Comparative description of surgical treatment methods for fractures of distal metaepiphysis of the humerus. Injury. 2009;3(10):301–307. (In Russ.).
2. Borukeev AK, Mistenbekov IB. Modern approaches to the treatment of fractures of distal metaepiphysis of the humerus (literature review). Medicine of Kyrgyzstan. 2014;7:6–11. (In Russ.).
3. Betz IG. Surgical treatment of humerus fractures and biological aspects of osteosynthesis. Injury. 2017;6(18):167–173. (In Russ.). http://doi.org/10.22141/1608-1706.6.18.2017.121196
4. Solod EI, Lazarev AF, Tsykunov MB, et al. Optimization of the rehabilitation process in the surgicall treatment of fractures of the distal end of the shoulder. Bulletin of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2015;3(67):29–32. (In Russ.).
5. Jacobsen DS, Marsell R, Wolf O. Epidemiology of proximal and diaphyseal humeral fractures in children: an observational study from the Swedish Fracture Register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(96):1–13. PMID: 35090422. PMCID: PMC8800264. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05042-0