Download PDF
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2018; 22(01): 012-024
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1609013
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Orthopaedic Fixation Devices Used in Children: A Radiologist's Guide

Hailey Allen
1   Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
,
Kirkland W. Davis
2   Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, CSC, Madison, Wisconsin
,
Kenneth Noonan
3   Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
,
Yoshimi Endo
4   Department of Radiology, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York
,
Jie C. Nguyen
5   Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
06 February 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Fractures are common in children with some requiring surgical reduction and fixation to maintain anatomical alignment. Although various surgical techniques and principles are shared between children and adults, certain unique considerations in children can influence the surgical approach and device selection. In particular, for skeletally immature children, it is of utmost importance to protect certain critical open growth plates because permanent injury can produce severe growth disturbances. The often robust healing response and potential limited patient compliance can also influence the treatment algorithm and decision making. Commonly encountered orthopaedic fixation devices, including screws, intramedullary devices, and plates, are reviewed with an emphasis on their mechanism and application in children. Additional miscellaneous devices that are commonly used to treat malalignment and guide bone growth including epiphysiodesis plates, proximal femur osteotomy plates, and spinal magnetic growing rods are also reviewed. The goal of this article is to provide a basic understanding of the principles and mechanisms of different types of pediatric orthopaedic devices and thereby improve the radiologist's diagnostic confidence and allow better anticipation of complications.

Keywords

fracture fixation - growth disturbance - magnetic nail and rod - pediatric growth plate - screws
 

  • References

  • 1 Jones IE, Williams SM, Dow N, Goulding A. How many children remain fracture-free during growth? A longitudinal study of children and adolescents participating in the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13 (12) 990-995
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Pretell-Mazzini J, Zafra-Jimenez JA, Rodriguez Martin J. Clinical application of locked plating system in children. An orthopaedic view. Int Orthop 2010; 34 (07) 931-938
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mizuta T, Benson WM, Foster BK, Paterson DC, Morris LL. Statistical analysis of the incidence of physeal injuries. J Pediatr Orthop 1987; 7 (05) 518-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Carter SR, Aldridge MJ, Fitzgerald R, Davies AM. Stress changes of the wrist in adolescent gymnasts. Br J Radiol 1988; 61 (722) 109-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wu M, Fallon R, Heyworth BE. Overuse injuries in the pediatric population. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev 2016; 24 (04) 150-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Brighton CT. The growth plate. Orthop Clin North Am 1984; 15 (04) 571-595
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Iannotti JP. Growth plate physiology and pathology. Orthop Clin North Am 1990; 21 (01) 1-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 von Laer L, Kraus R, Linhart W. Fractures and Dislocations. 5th ed. New York, NY: Thieme; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Shim KS. Pubertal growth and epiphyseal fusion. Ann Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2015; 20 (01) 8-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rodríguez-Merchán EC. Pediatric skeletal trauma: a review and historical perspective. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; (432) 8-13
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Vopat ML, Kane PM, Christino MA. , et al. Treatment of diaphyseal forearm fractures in children. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2014; 6 (02) 5325
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Price CT. Surgical management of forearm and distal radius fractures in children and adolescents. Instr Course Lect 2008; 57: 509-514
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Noonan KJ, Price CT. Forearm and distal radius fractures in children. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1998; 6 (03) 146-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ecklund K, Jaramillo D. Imaging of growth disturbance in children. Radiol Clin North Am 2001; 39 (04) 823-841
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 von Laer L. Classification, diagnosis, and treatment of transitional fractures of the distal part of the tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985; 67 (05) 687-698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kanlic E, Cruz M. Current concepts in pediatric femur fracture treatment. Orthopedics 2007; 30 (12) 1015-1019
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Townsend DR, Hoffinger S. Intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures in children via the trochanter tip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000; (376) 113-118
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Davis KW. Principles and complications of orthopedic hardware. In: Pope TL. , ed. Musculoskeletal Imaging. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2015: 1107-1122
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Barry M, Paterson JM. A flexible intramedullary nails for fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86 (07) 947-953
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Duan X, Li T, Mohammed AQ, Xiang Z. Reamed intramedullary nailing versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for shaft fracture of femur: a systematic literature review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; 131 (10) 1445-1452
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Forster MC, Aster AS, Ahmed S. Reaming during anterograde femoral nailing: is it worth it?. Injury 2005; 36 (03) 445-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Clatworthy MG, Clark DI, Gray DH, Hardy AE. Reamed versus unreamed femoral nails. A randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80 (03) 485-489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ligier JN, Metaizeau JP, Prévot J, Lascombes P. Elastic stable intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures in children. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1988; 70 (01) 74-77
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Baldwin K, Morrison III MJ, Tomlinson LA, Ramirez R, Flynn JM. Both bone forearm fractures in children and adolescents, which fixation strategy is superior—plates or nails? A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Orthop Trauma 2014; 28 (01) e8-e14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Perren SM. Evolution of the internal fixation of long bone fractures. The scientific basis of biological internal fixation: choosing a new balance between stability and biology. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2002; 84 (08) 1093-1110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Uhthoff HK, Poitras P, Backman DS. Internal plate fixation of fractures: short history and recent developments. J Orthop Sci 2006; 11 (02) 118-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Hernanz González Y, Díaz Martín A, Jara Sánchez F, Resines Erasun C. Early results with the new internal fixator systems LCP and LISS: a prospective study. Acta Orthop Belg 2007; 73 (01) 60-69
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wagner M. General principles for the clinical use of the LCP. Injury 2003; 34 (Suppl. 02) B31-B42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Castañeda P, Urquhart B, Sullivan E, Haynes RJ. Hemiepiphysiodesis for the correction of angular deformity about the knee. J Pediatr Orthop 2008; 28 (02) 188-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Wiemann IV JM, Tryon C, Szalay EA. Physeal stapling versus 8-plate hemiepiphysiodesis for guided correction of angular deformity about the knee. J Pediatr Orthop 2009; 29 (05) 481-485
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Saran N, Rathjen KE. Guided growth for the correction of pediatric lower limb angular deformity. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2010; 18 (09) 528-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Boero S, Michelis MB, Riganti S. Use of the eight-Plate for angular correction of knee deformities due to idiopathic and pathologic physis: initiating treatment according to etiology. J Child Orthop 2011; 5 (03) 209-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Noonan KJ, Halanski MA, Leiferman E, Wilsman N. Growth retardation (hemiepiphyseal stapling) and growth acceleration (periosteal resection) as a method to improve guided growth in a lamb model. J Pediatr Orthop 2016; 36 (04) 362-369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Chung MK, Kwon SS, Cho BC. , et al. Incidence and risk factors of hardware-related complications after proximal femoral osteotomy in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Orthop B 2017; March 8 (Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Beauchesne R, Miller F, Moseley C. Proximal femoral osteotomy using the AO fixed-angle blade plate. J Pediatr Orthop 1992; 12 (06) 735-740
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hau R, Dickens DR, Nattrass GR, O'Sullivan M, Torode IP, Graham HK. Which implant for proximal femoral osteotomy in children? A comparison of the AO (ASIF) 90 degree fixed-angle blade plate and the Richards intermediate hip screw. J Pediatr Orthop 2000; 20 (03) 336-343
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Renshaw TS. The role of Harrington instrumentation and posterior spine fusion in the management of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Orthop Clin North Am 1988; 19 (02) 257-267
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Nguyen JC, Lee KS, Thapa MM, Rosas HG. US evaluation of juvenile idiopathic arthritis and osteoarticular infection. Radiographics 2017; 37 (04) 1181-1201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Thompson W, Thakar C, Rolton DJ, Wilson-MacDonald J, Nnadi C. The use of magnetically-controlled growing rods to treat children with early-onset scoliosis: early radiological results in 19 children. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B (09) 1240-1247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Joyce TJ, Smith SL, Rushton PRP, Bowey AJ, Gibson MJ. Analysis of explanted magnetically controlled growing rods from 7 UK spinal centers. Spine 2017; April 28 (Epub ahead of print)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Laor T, Jaramillo D. MR imaging insights into skeletal maturation: what is normal?. Radiology 2009; 250 (01) 28-38
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar