Nonoperative versus operative management of pediatric type 1 open fractures.

IF 1.4 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Kevin Schauer, Dylan Lis, Ellen Lutnick, Lauren Harte, M Nadir Haider, Jeremy Doak
{"title":"Nonoperative versus operative management of pediatric type 1 open fractures.","authors":"Kevin Schauer, Dylan Lis, Ellen Lutnick, Lauren Harte, M Nadir Haider, Jeremy Doak","doi":"10.1007/s00590-025-04277-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare outcomes, including complications and admission status of pediatric type I open fractures treated operatively versus nonoperatively, and to expand on a previously published analysis regarding the efficacy and safety of nonoperative treatment of pediatric type I open fractures by this group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective chart review via ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes correlated with type 1 open fractures of long bones at our Level 1 Children's Hospital from 2000 to 2020. Nonoperative management included IV antibiotics and closed reduction and immobilization under sedation. Operative management included formal I&D and ORIF. Demographics, antibiotic administration, hospitalization, and complications were compared using independent t test, and chi-squared or fisher exact test. Radiographic healing was analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety patients met inclusion criteria [52 nonoperative (NO), 38 operative (OR)] (Table 1). Patients were treated predominately with cefazolin (NO 85.7%, OR 71.4%). Nonoperative patients were more frequently given oral antibiotics (NO 82.7%, OR 44.7%, p value 0.004). Those treated operatively were more frequently admitted (71.1% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). There were three deep infections in the operative cohort requiring repeat operative I&D (p 0.110) (Table 2). There were more incisional infections (7.9% vs. 1.9%), nonunion (2.6% vs. 0%), and ED visits/readmissions (10.5% vs. 3.8%) in the operative cohort. Loss of reduction was more common in the nonoperative cohort (9.6% vs. 5.2%), and refracture/peri-implant fracture in the operative (10.5% vs. 0%). Comparison of overall complications favored the nonoperative group (p = 0.037, Table 3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nonoperative management is a safe and effective treatment of pediatric type I open fractures, including decreased hospital admission and elimination of anesthesia risks.</p><p><strong>Level iii evidence: </strong>Retrospective comparative study.</p>","PeriodicalId":50484,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","volume":"35 1","pages":"158"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-025-04277-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare outcomes, including complications and admission status of pediatric type I open fractures treated operatively versus nonoperatively, and to expand on a previously published analysis regarding the efficacy and safety of nonoperative treatment of pediatric type I open fractures by this group.

Methods: Retrospective chart review via ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes correlated with type 1 open fractures of long bones at our Level 1 Children's Hospital from 2000 to 2020. Nonoperative management included IV antibiotics and closed reduction and immobilization under sedation. Operative management included formal I&D and ORIF. Demographics, antibiotic administration, hospitalization, and complications were compared using independent t test, and chi-squared or fisher exact test. Radiographic healing was analyzed.

Results: Ninety patients met inclusion criteria [52 nonoperative (NO), 38 operative (OR)] (Table 1). Patients were treated predominately with cefazolin (NO 85.7%, OR 71.4%). Nonoperative patients were more frequently given oral antibiotics (NO 82.7%, OR 44.7%, p value 0.004). Those treated operatively were more frequently admitted (71.1% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). There were three deep infections in the operative cohort requiring repeat operative I&D (p 0.110) (Table 2). There were more incisional infections (7.9% vs. 1.9%), nonunion (2.6% vs. 0%), and ED visits/readmissions (10.5% vs. 3.8%) in the operative cohort. Loss of reduction was more common in the nonoperative cohort (9.6% vs. 5.2%), and refracture/peri-implant fracture in the operative (10.5% vs. 0%). Comparison of overall complications favored the nonoperative group (p = 0.037, Table 3).

Conclusions: Nonoperative management is a safe and effective treatment of pediatric type I open fractures, including decreased hospital admission and elimination of anesthesia risks.

Level iii evidence: Retrospective comparative study.

儿童1型开放性骨折的非手术与手术治疗。
目的:比较儿童I型开放性骨折手术治疗与非手术治疗的结果,包括并发症和入院情况,并扩展先前发表的关于该组儿童I型开放性骨折非手术治疗的疗效和安全性的分析。方法:采用ICD-9和ICD-10编码对我院2000 - 2020年1型开放性长骨骨折病例进行回顾性分析。非手术治疗包括静脉注射抗生素和镇静下闭合复位和固定。手术管理包括正式的I&D和ORIF。采用独立t检验、卡方检验或fisher精确检验比较人口统计学、抗生素使用、住院和并发症。分析影像学愈合情况。结果:90例患者符合纳入标准[非手术(NO) 52例,手术(OR) 38例](表1)。患者主要使用头孢唑林治疗(NO 85.7%, OR 71.4%)。非手术患者较多使用口服抗生素(NO 82.7%, OR 44.7%, p值0.004)。结论:非手术治疗是一种安全有效的治疗儿科I型开放性骨折的方法,包括减少住院率和消除麻醉风险。iii级证据:回顾性比较研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.90%
发文量
265
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology (EJOST) aims to publish high quality Orthopedic scientific work. The objective of our journal is to disseminate meaningful, impactful, clinically relevant work from each and every region of the world, that has the potential to change and or inform clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信