Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the open reduction of displaced pediatric supracondylar humerus fracture.

BACKGROUND

This study's objective was to compare the results and adverse outcomes of the anterior approach and posterior approach in patients with a type 3 Gartland pediatric supracondylar fracture who failed close treatment and indicated open reduction.

METHODS

in this retrospective study patients with Gartland type 3 fracture who failed close reduction and required open reduction were enrolled in the study. Eligible patients underwent open reduction via anterior and posterior triceps sparing approaches. Patients were followed up 3, 6, and 12 months after the surgery. Study variables included age, sex, Bauman's angle, pin site infection, nerve injury, osteonecrosis, and elbow arc of motion.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 83 patients. Surgery was performed on 49 patients using the posterior technique and 34 patients using the anterior approach. The mean age of patients was 6.78 ± 1.40 years. The mean age and the relative frequency of sex didn't differ significantly between study groups (P > 0.05). Two-way repeated measures ANOVA test showed that there was a statistically significant difference in elbow arc of motion in the anterior approach in comparison with the posterior approach, however, this increase was not clinically significant. In terms of adverse events including pin site infection, nerve injury, osteonecrosis, and cubitus varus, there was no statistically significant difference between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

There was no clinically significant difference in elbow arc of motion and adverse events between the anterior approach and the posterior approach. Therefore, surgeons should choose the approach with which they are more familiar and comfortable.