Lateral condylar fractures of the humerus in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: Displaced fractures of the lateral condyle of the humerus are frequently managed surgically with the aim of avoiding nonunion, malunion, disturbances of growth and later arthritis. The ideal method of fixation is however not known, and treatment varies between surgeons and hospitals. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of two well-established forms of surgical treatment, Kirschner wire (K-wire) and screw fixation. Patients and Methods: A retrospective cohort study of children who underwent surgical treatment for a fracture of the lateral condyle of the humerus between January 2005 and December 2014 at two centres was undertaken. Pre, intraoperative and postoperative characteristics were evaluated. A total of 336 children were included in the study. Their mean age at the time of injury was 5.8 years (0 to 15) with a male:female patient ratio of 3:2. A total of 243 (72%) had a Milch II fracture and the fracture was displaced by > 2 mm in 228 (68%). In all, 235 patients underwent K-wire fixation and 101 had screw fixation. Results: There was a higher rate of nonunion with K-wire fixation (p = 0.02). There was no difference in Baumann's angle, carrying angle or the rate of major complications between the two groups. No benefit was obtained by immobilizing the elbow for more than four weeks in either group. No short-term complications were seen when fixation crossed the lateral ossific nucleus. Conclusion: Fixation of lateral condylar humeral fractures in children using either K-wires or screws gives satisfactory results. Proponents of both techniques may find justification of their methods in our data, but prospective, randomized trials with long-term follow-up are required to confirm the findings, which suggest a higher rate of nonunion with K-wire fixation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:387-95.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".