Forearm Fractures

kid bbff 1kid bbff 2

 

Ossification

 

Primary

- 8 / 52 gestation radius & ulna

 

Secondary

- distal radius age 1

- proximal radius 4

- distal ulna age 5

 

Growth

 

Majority from distal physis

- 75% radius

- 80% ulna

 

Types

 

Complete 

Greenstick

Buckle / torus

Single or both bone

Galeazzi / Monteggia

 

Non Operative Management

 

BBFF accept 1BBFF 2

 

Acceptable Position

 

< 10 years old:  < 15 degrees malalignment

> 10 years old:  < 10 degrees malalignment

 

< 1 - 2 years of growth remaining: Anatomic alignment required

 

Operative Management

 

Indications

 

Outside parameters for non-operative treatment (see above)

Loss of reduction

 

Options for displaced fractures

 

1.  MUA

 

Indications

- young patients < 10

- greenstick fractures

 

2.  Compression Plating

 

Advantage

- rigid, anatomical fixation

 

Disadvantage

- increased scarring

- risk of complications with plate removal including refracture

- increased risk of infection and nerve injury

 

3.  Intramedullary elastic nail

 

Advantage

- smaller scars with insertion

- easier to remove than plates

 

Disadvantage

- generally immobilized

- must be removed

- non anatomical reduction compared with plates with theoretical risk of loss supination / pronation

- risk of extensor tendon rupture due to prominence of nails at insertion sites

 

Results

 

Intramedullary nail v plate

 

Zhao et al World J Surg 2017

- meta-analysis of 13 RCTS

- IM nailing reduced operative time and complications compared to plate

- no difference in time to union, union rate, or loss of forearm rotation

 

Shah et al J Orthop Trauma 2010

- comparison of plate (46) v nail (15) for 61 adolescents average age 14

- 83% in both groups obtained full rotation

- no major complications in nail group

- 5 major complications in plate group

 

Manipulation under anaesthesia

 

Post reduction Positioning / Rule of Thirds 

 

1.  Fracture proximal to the insertion of Pronator Teres

 

Proximal fragment supinated by biceps

- supinate the forearm

- match proximal fragment 

 

Prox 1Prox 2Dist 3Prox 4

 

2. Fracture in the middle third 

 

Midposition / neutral

- biceps / pronator teres balanced

 

Midshaft 1Midshaft 2Mid 3Mid 4

 

3. Fracture in the distal third

 

Proximal fragment pronated by pronator teres

- pronation is the position of choice

 

Prox fore 1Prox fore 2

 

TENS technique

 

Tens 1tens 2

 

Synthes titanium elastic nail techique PDF

 

AO Surgery Radius Tens

AO Surgery Ulna Tens

 

Vumedi technique

 

Technique

 

Radius (typically first as more difficult to reduce)

 

Entry point with awl 2 cm proximal to distal physis

 

1.  Radial styloid / distal lateral entry 

- ensure radial nerve / cephalic vein, 1st extensor compartment protected

 

2.  Listers tubercle / dorsal entry

 

Tens dorsoulnatens listersRadial awl

 

Elastic Nail size

 

60 - 70% of the intramedullary canal

Typically 1.5 - 2.5 mm

 

Fracture reduction

 

Avoid passing nails incorrectly multiple times as may cause compartment syndrome

Bend tip of elastic nail

May need small open reduction

 

Cut nail

 

Withdraw 1 cm, cut with endcutter, then advance

 

Ulna (usually reduced after radius fixation)

 

Entry point 2 cm distal to apophyseal plate

 

1.  Proximal lateral

- avoids ulna nerve

 

3.  Distal medial

 

tens prox ulna

 

Postoperative

 

Cast in supination to tighten interosseous membrane

Cast 6 weeks

 

Removal of TENS at 4 - 6 months once osseous union established

 

Single v Double Elastic Nail

 

Dietz et al. J Pediatr Orthop 2010

- retrospective review of 38 children with both bone forearm fractures

- treated only with ulna elastic nail

- all patients had union with restoration of rotation

- two patients had angulation of the radius > 20 degrees that underwent surgical intervention

 

ORIF with plates

 

Plates 1Plates 2Plates 3Plates 4

 

AO surgery Henry approach to radius

 

AO surgery approach to ulna

 

AO surgery compression plating technique

 

Single versus Double plate

 

Khaled et al Int Orthop 2022

- RCT of 100 patients with both bone forearm fractures

- ulna plating versus ulna & radius plating

- no difference in outcome, range of motion or union rates

- some loss of position in radius when not plated

 

Complications

 

Compartment syndrome

 

Martus et al J Paediatr Orthop 2013

- 205 fractures treated with elastic nail

- 3/205 (1.5%) compartment syndrome

 

Nonunion

 

Forearm nonunion TENS 1Forearm TENS nonunion 2

 

Fernandez et al J Paediatr Orthop 2009

- 592 patients treated with elastic nail

- 6/592 (1%) nonunion / pseudoarthrosis

- all in ulna, 5/6 opened in surgery to facilitate nail passage

 

Refracture

 

Makki et al J Paediatr Orthop B 2014

- plate removal refracture rate 8.5% if removed within 12 months of implantation

- nail removal refracture rate 17% if nail removed within 6 months of implantation

 

Clement et al JBJS Br 2012

- 82 children with retained forearm plates followed for 8 years

- 7% incidence of implant related fractures

 

Extensor tendon injuries with elastic nails

 

Kruppa et al Medicine 2017

- 202 elastic nails

- 3/202 (1.5%) EPL ruptures

 

Murphy et al J Pediatr Orthop 2019

- systematic review of 33 EPL ruptures post elastic nail

- all with dorsal approach to the radius

- average 10 weeks post surgery

- treated with repair, EIP to EPL transfer, or graft reconstruction with palmeris longus