Introduction: We conducted a prospective study on 29 patients comparing the medium-term outcome between intramedullary nail fixation and plate fixation in paediatric forearm fractures.

Materials and Methods: The criteria were patients who had a nail (10) or plate fixation (19) for a single or both bones forearm fracture between 2004 and 2006. All these patients were recalled following ethical approval for assessment of their grip strength using a hand dynamometer, forearm and elbow range of movements, scar assessment, POSNA outcome questionnaire and new radiographic views of the forearms.

Results: Mean age of 10.4 years for both groups (4–16), All fractures were caused by low velocity falls. Grip strength is reduced in 83% of patients, comparable in both groups. Elbow flexion is more reduced in the plating group but more reduction in extension in the nailing group. The reduction in forearm pronation (69% of patients) and supination (61%) were comparable in both groups. Using the ‘Manchester scar proforma’; the plating group scored worse with 14/21; nail 11/21. ‘POSNA outcome questionnaire’ score showed the nailing group had 90% excellent or good result and plating group 74%. The moderate and poor POSNA outcome (26% plate, 10% nail) were associated with pain, restricted rotation, bad scarring and difficulty lifting heavy objects. Nails were removed after bony healing but all plates were left in situ. Complete remodeling of forearm bones were seen in all radiographs in both groups. One case of non-iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury and two cases of wound infection were noted; all made full recovery.

Conclusion: The medium-term outcome at 2.5 years following either fixation method is generally comparable and good. The obvious differences were; a higher (better) POSNA score in the nailing group, larger scar formation in plating, elbow extension restriction in nailing and elbow flexion restriction in plating group. Factors that were comparable were grip strength, forearm rotation and radiographic remodeling and outcome.

Introduction Most proximal humeral fractures are treated conservatively. However, treatment for the severely displaced fractures (Neer’s grade IV) is more challenging. This is especially in the adolescent age group where the remodelling potential is reduced. We report on our 8-year experience of fixing severely displaced proximal humeral fractures in children using ESIN.

Method Between 1996 and 2003, we treated 14 children (7 metaphyseal and 7 epiphyseal fractures) using ESIN. 11 were completely displaced and 12 were caused by high energy forces. Our indications included unstable fracture with severe displacement (> 2/3 shaft diameter), age above 12 years and multiple injuries/polytrauma. Manipulation of the fractures and the operative technique is described. Post-operatively, the arm is kept in a sling for 2 weeks. All patients were reviewed on a monthly basis until clinical and radiological healing. Following the removal of the nails, the patients are only discharged when they demonstrate full pain-free range of movement.

Results The double nail technique was used in the first 2 cases and a single nail was used for the subsequent 12 cases. The fracture was reduced by open technique in 1 case. In another, the nail was inserted antegrade. Time from injury to surgery was 2.4 days. The mean operation time was 65 minutes and hospital stay 2.1 days. Time to clinical healing (complete pain-free range of movement) was 2.4 months and radiological healing 3.2 months. All nails were removed by 6 months. Shoulder and elbow range of movement returned to normal at 3.5 and 3.2 months. Complications included 4 cases of elbow stiffness due to nail prominence and 1 case of nail breakage during removal. 1 patient had 10 degrees of varus and in 2 other patients, 5 degrees of varus and 1 cm of shortening and 1.5 cm of shortening respectively. At the final follow-up (14.6 months), all patients had symptom free full range of movement.

Conclusion ESIN is a valid treatment for the severely displaced proximal humeral fractures in the adolescence. It avoids lengthy and awkward immobilization and allows early post-operative mobilization. The single nail technique proved to be adequate to maintain alignment and allow fracture healing, keeping the invasiveness of the procedure to a minimum.

Introduction ESIN is an established method of treatment of long bone fractures in children, which has been in regular use in our institution since 1996. We report on our 7-year experience of using ESIN for the treatment of long bone fractures in children.

Method 92 fractures were nailed (26 femoral, 12 tibial, 17 humeral and 37 forearm). The average age was 12 years (7–15) and average follow-up 15 months. Main indications included unstable and severely displaced fractures, failure of conservative treatment and polytrauma or head injury. Data collection included mechanism of injury, fracture configuration, treatment delay, operation time and technique, length of hospital stay, rehabilitation, healing, nail removal and complications.

Results 49% of fractures were caused by road traffic accidents. All were diaphyseal apart from 14 proximal humeral fractures. The average surgery delay was 7 days and operation time 78 minutes. Open reduction was performed in 3 femoral, 1 humeral and 18 forearm fractures. Single nailing was used for the proximal humeral and forearm fracture. The average hospital stay was 5.8 days, ranging from 12 days for femoral to 2 days for forearm fractures. Clinical healing was achieved at 3.5, 4.3, 2.4 and 2.1 months respectively for femoral, tibial, humeral and forearm fractures.

The commonest complication (25%) was skiin irritation around the entry site, which invariably resolved after implant removal. Delayed union occurred in 2 femoral and 2 tibial fractures (all healed following bone marrow injection). 2 tibial fractures mal-united and 1 tibial fracture was complicated with compartment syndrome. The average nail removal time was 9 months. The nails could not be removed in 4 cases.

Conclusion ESIN is minimally invasive and has a low complication rate. It avoids the lengthy immobilization of conservative treatment, and the surgical trauma of plating without the association of refractures or nerve damage. We believe it represents a valid option in the treatment of long bone fractures.