Cargando…
Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series
Supramalleolar osteotomy (SMO) in pediatric patients can be fixed in various ways. We analyzed the records of 77 pediatric patients (124 SMOs) aged ≤16 years. In 56 patients (96 SMOs), K-wires were used to stabilize SMOs (WF group), while 21 patients (28 SMOs) were treated with locking compression p...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33513700 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8020086 |
_version_ | 1783656591014232064 |
---|---|
author | Schlemmer, Thomas Brunner, Reinald Speth, Bernhard Mayr, Johannes Rutz, Erich |
author_facet | Schlemmer, Thomas Brunner, Reinald Speth, Bernhard Mayr, Johannes Rutz, Erich |
author_sort | Schlemmer, Thomas |
collection | PubMed |
description | Supramalleolar osteotomy (SMO) in pediatric patients can be fixed in various ways. We analyzed the records of 77 pediatric patients (124 SMOs) aged ≤16 years. In 56 patients (96 SMOs), K-wires were used to stabilize SMOs (WF group), while 21 patients (28 SMOs) were treated with locking compression plates (LCPs; PF group). We recorded time to radiographic consolidation, rate of complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and time to implant removal. Mean time to radiographic consolidation of SMOs was 7.2 weeks in the WF group and 11.1 weeks in the PF group. Complication rate in the WF group was 10.7%. LOS was similar in the two groups (7.0 days in the WF group vs. 7.3 days in the PF group). K-wire stabilization resulted in a shortened interval until consolidation of osteotomies, but children were required to use a cast. Stabilization of SMOs with LCPs facilitated early mobilization and functional rehabilitation with no need to apply a cast. In conclusion, both methods provided safe fixation of SMOs with a low rate of complications. K-wire stabilization combined with a cast achieves fast consolidation of SMOs. We recommend SMO stabilization with angular stable LCPs in patients with muscular weakness or spasticity in whom early mobilization and physiotherapy are necessary to prevent loss of muscle power, muscle function, and bone mass. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7912499 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79124992021-02-28 Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series Schlemmer, Thomas Brunner, Reinald Speth, Bernhard Mayr, Johannes Rutz, Erich Children (Basel) Article Supramalleolar osteotomy (SMO) in pediatric patients can be fixed in various ways. We analyzed the records of 77 pediatric patients (124 SMOs) aged ≤16 years. In 56 patients (96 SMOs), K-wires were used to stabilize SMOs (WF group), while 21 patients (28 SMOs) were treated with locking compression plates (LCPs; PF group). We recorded time to radiographic consolidation, rate of complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and time to implant removal. Mean time to radiographic consolidation of SMOs was 7.2 weeks in the WF group and 11.1 weeks in the PF group. Complication rate in the WF group was 10.7%. LOS was similar in the two groups (7.0 days in the WF group vs. 7.3 days in the PF group). K-wire stabilization resulted in a shortened interval until consolidation of osteotomies, but children were required to use a cast. Stabilization of SMOs with LCPs facilitated early mobilization and functional rehabilitation with no need to apply a cast. In conclusion, both methods provided safe fixation of SMOs with a low rate of complications. K-wire stabilization combined with a cast achieves fast consolidation of SMOs. We recommend SMO stabilization with angular stable LCPs in patients with muscular weakness or spasticity in whom early mobilization and physiotherapy are necessary to prevent loss of muscle power, muscle function, and bone mass. MDPI 2021-01-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7912499/ /pubmed/33513700 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8020086 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Schlemmer, Thomas Brunner, Reinald Speth, Bernhard Mayr, Johannes Rutz, Erich Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title | Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title_full | Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title_fullStr | Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title_short | Differences between Two Methods to Stabilize Supramalleolar Osteotomies in Children—A Retrospective Case Series |
title_sort | differences between two methods to stabilize supramalleolar osteotomies in children—a retrospective case series |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33513700 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/children8020086 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schlemmerthomas differencesbetweentwomethodstostabilizesupramalleolarosteotomiesinchildrenaretrospectivecaseseries AT brunnerreinald differencesbetweentwomethodstostabilizesupramalleolarosteotomiesinchildrenaretrospectivecaseseries AT spethbernhard differencesbetweentwomethodstostabilizesupramalleolarosteotomiesinchildrenaretrospectivecaseseries AT mayrjohannes differencesbetweentwomethodstostabilizesupramalleolarosteotomiesinchildrenaretrospectivecaseseries AT rutzerich differencesbetweentwomethodstostabilizesupramalleolarosteotomiesinchildrenaretrospectivecaseseries |