Review Question - QID 3579

Action	Numeric Key	Letter Key	Function Key
Choose 1	1
Choose 2	2
Choose 3	3
Choose 4	4
Choose 5	5
Submit Response			Enter
Previous Question			Left Arrow
Next Question		N	Right Arrow
Open/Close Bookmode		C
Open Image			Spacebar

Both Bone Forearm Fracture - Pediatric Techniques Percutaneous vs. Open Intramedullary Nailing QID: 3579 (OBQ11.156)

QID 3579 (Type "3579" in App Search)

A 10-year-old boy falls off his bicycle sustaining the injury seen in Figures A and B. After initial unsuccessful closed reduction, he undergoes operative fixation. When comparing ORIF with a plate to a percutaneous technique using intramedullary nails (IMN), which of the following is true?

Type & Select Correct Answer

Type in at least one full word to see suggestions list

Non-union rates are significantly higher in the IMN group

10%

313/3045

Blood loss is higher in the IMN group

25/3045

Restoration of radial bow is similar in both groups

70%

2119/3045

Surgical time is greater in the IMN group

138/3045

Forearm rotation is greater in the ORIF group

14%

440/3045

Select Answer to see Preferred Response

Review TC In New Tab

The clinical scenario and radiographs depict a pediatric diaphyseal radius and ulna fracture. Operative indications include open fractures and fractures with unacceptable alignment after closed reduction. The optimal fracture patterns for IMN technique are midshaft pediatric both bone forearm fractures with minimal comminution in transverse and oblique patterns and acutely after injury prior to the presentation of fracture callus. Restoration of radial bow has been shown to be similar with both IMN and ORIF.

Reinhardt et al reviewed the outcomes of 31 pediatric both bone forearm fractures treated with intramedullary nailing (IMN) versus ORIF. The IMN group had shorter surgical time and less blood loss. No differences were found in rates of union, radial bow magnitude, or forearm rotation.