Affiliations: Department of Surgery, Clinic for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Freiburg University Hospital, Freiburg, Germany
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Kilian Reising, Department of Surgery, Clinic for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Freiburg University Hospital, Hugstetter Str. 55, D-79106 Freiburg, Germany. Tel.: +49 76127024010; Fax: +49 76127028571; E-mail:kilian.reising@uniklinik-freiburg.de
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Closed reduction and percutaneous pinning is regarded as the treatment of
choice for unstable supracondylar humerus fractures, but there are cases in
which the use of external fixation is preferable.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the
method of external fixation could be considered as a stable alternative to
percutaneous pinning and whether there was a difference in stability between
two different external fixator constructs.
METHODS: Eighteen synthetic humeri were allocated to three groups of
six bones each. The specimens of group 1 were fixed by crossed pinning,
those of group 2 by a new variation of an external fixator and the specimens
of group 3 by an established variation of it. Osteotomy displacement was
measured under static loading in internal and external rotation, as well as
in extension and flexion.
RESULTS: The external fixators proved to be significantly more stable than crossed
pinning in sagittal loading. In internal rotation loading the new variation
of the external fixator showed the best results.
CONCLUSIONS: In case of fractures that can't be replaced by closed reduction the new
variation of external fixator should be preferred to the established
variation or open reduction and crossed pinning.
