Because of the changing referral patterns, operative pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures are increasingly being treated at tertiary referral centers. To expedite patient flow, type II fractures are sometimes pinned in a delayed manner. We sought to determine if delay in surgical treatment of modified Gartland type II supracondylar humerus fractures would affect the rate of complications following closed reduction and percutaneous pinning.

We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 399 modified Gartland type II supracondylar fractures treated operatively at a tertiary referral center over 4 years. Mean patient age in the type II group was 5 years (range, 1 to 15 y). A total of 48% were pinned within 24 hours, 52% pinned >24 hours after the injury.

No difference was in detected in rates of major complications between the early and delayed treatment group. Four percent of patients sustained a complication (16 patients). There were no compartment syndromes, vascular injuries, or permanent nerve injuries. Complications included nerve injury (3), physical therapy referral for stiffness (3), pin site infection (2 treated with oral antibiotics, 4 treated with debridement), refracture (2), and loss of fixation or broken hardware (2). Of the 3 patients who sustained nerve injuries, all underwent surgery within 24 hours of injury. One patient developed an ulnar motor and sensory nerve palsy after fixation with crossed K-wires. This resolved by 7 weeks postoperatively. Two patients presented with an anterior interosseous nerve palsy-1 resolved 1 week after surgery, the other by 8 weeks postoperatively.

Delay in surgery did not result in an increased rate of major complications following closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of type II supracondylar humerus fractures in children. Further prospective work is necessary to determine if there are subtle treatment benefits from emergent treatment of type II supracondylar humerus fractures.

Level III-retrospective comparative series.

Polls results

On a scale of 1 to 10, rate how much this article will change your clinical practice?

NO change
BIG change
100% Article relates to my practice (5/5)
0% Article does not relate to my practice (0/5)
0% Undecided (0/5)

Will this article lead to more cost-effective healthcare?

60% Yes (3/5)
40% No (2/5)
0% Undecided (0/5)

Was this article biased? (commercial or personal)

0% Yes (0/5)
100% No (5/5)
0% Undecided (0/5)

What level of evidence do you think this article is?

0% Level 1 (0/5)
40% Level 2 (2/5)
40% Level 3 (2/5)
20% Level 4 (1/5)
0% Level 5 (0/5)