These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Operative Treatment of Distal Tibial Fractures in Children Managed With Epiphyseal Screws: A Comparison of Outcomes When Screws Are Retained Versus Removed Following Fracture Union.
    Author: Zimmerman R, Rupp G, Barger K, Fang W, Thomas E, Bastrom T, Pennock A, Schlechter J.
    Journal: J Pediatr Orthop; 2024 Aug 01; 44(7):e588-e591. PubMed ID: 38869022.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Fractures of the distal tibial epiphysis in children are often accompanied by articular surface disruption. With increased displacement, internal fixation is frequently performed with an epiphyseal screw to close the fracture gap. Despite limited, high-level clinical evidence to support implant removal, epiphyseal screws are commonly removed after fracture healing due to potentially increased contact forces on the tibiotalar joint. The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare outcomes and complications in children that underwent surgical treatment of distal tibial epiphyseal fractures with placement of an epiphyseal screw(s) and had the implant(s) retained versus removed at a minimum of 2-year postoperative follow-up. METHODS: Children younger than 18 years from two urban tertiary care centers who underwent operative management of distal tibia Salter-Harris III and IV fractures using epiphyseal screws (2013-2020) were divided into two cohorts: retained epiphyseal screws and implant removed. Demographics, intraoperative, postoperative, and radiographic data were collected. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) questionnaires were collected at the final follow-up. Statistical analysis, including power analysis, was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-two children were included (30 males, 22 females) with a mean age of 13.3 years at the time of injury (range, 7.7-16.4 years). Thirty-five children retained the implants; seventeen had implants removed. All completed the FAAM questionnaires at a mean follow-up of 4.4 ± 1.9 years, while 29 completed the SANE questionnaire at a mean follow-up of 4.4 ± 1.7 years. No statistically significant difference in patient demographics, surgical variables, or PROs was observed. Six children experienced complications from the initial surgery, including infections and complex regional pain syndrome, with no difference in complication rates between the cohorts ( P =0.08). Furthermore, no complication was observed as a result of implant removal. CONCLUSIONS: Children with retained epiphyseal implants have similar functional outcomes as compared with those who had implants removed after distal tibial epiphyseal fracture fixation and union. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-Retrospective comparative study.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]