9 years’ follow-up of 168 pin-fixed supracondylar humerus fractures in children

Figures & data

Figure 1. Operatively treated supracondylar humerus fractures 2002–2006. Patients’ participation in the study and fracture classification by Gartland.

Figure 2. Carrying angle and elbow range of motion in 65 patients at mean 9 years after pin fixation of supracondylar humerus fracture.

Table 1. Questionnaire and answers (patients n = 168)

				Answers
	Questions		Answer options	“yes”	mean (range)
1.	How satisfied are you with the appearance of the fractured elbow?	0–10	Very unsatisfied—very satisfied		8.7 (2–10)
2.	How satisfied are you with the functional outcome of the fractured elbow?	0–10	Very unsatisfied—very satisfied		9.0 (2–10)
3.	Do you have any pain at rest in the fractured elbow?	no/yes		7
	If you answered yes, how intense has the pain been in the past week?	0–10	No pain—worst pain you can imagine		3.0 (1–8)
4.	Do you have any pain in motion in the fractured elbow?	no/yes		21
	If you answered yes, how intense has the pain been in the past week?	0–10	No pain—worst pain you can imagine		3.9 (1–8)
5.	Are the carrying angles of your elbows symmetrical?	no/yes		140
6.	Do your elbows flex symmetrically?	no/yes		149
7.	Do your elbows extend symmetrically?	no/yes		132

Table 2. Patients’ subjective estimation compared with the control visit findings (n = 65)

		Asymmetry	Unrecognized asymmetry >5°			Recognized asymmetry >5°
		≤ 5˚	6–10°	11–15°	> 15°	6–10°	11–15°	> 15°
Flexion deficit		4	1	2	0	1	1	1
Extension	deficit	0	1	0	0	1	1	0
	hyper	9	11	0	0	4	1	0
Carrying angle	varus	2	8	2	1	4	4	2
	valgus	0	0	0	0	2	0	0

Table 3. Long-term outcome by Flynn’s criteria at follow-up visit (n = 65)

Fracture type	Loss of motion			Loss of carrying angle
(Gartland)	II	III	Flexion	II	III	Flexion
	n = 10	n = 53	n = 2	n = 10	n = 53	n = 2
Satisfactory
Excellent (0–5˚)	8	46	2	6	38	1
Good (6–10˚)	1	3	0	0	10	1
Fair (11–15˚)	0	4	0	3	3	0
Unsatisfactory
Poor (> 15˚)	1	0	0	1	2	0