• Tamás Kassai, Zsófia Krupa, Gergő Józsa, Dániel Hanna, and Marcell Varga.
• Manninger Jenő, Baleseti Központ, Department of Pediatric Trauma Surgery, Budapest,Hungary.
• Injury. 2024 Sep 1; 55 Suppl 3: 111403111403.

IntroductionIn our retrospective study we compared the outcomes of paediatric lateral condyle fractures of the elbow fixed by bioabsorbable pins and tension-band sutures or by metallic tension-band with K-wires.Materials And MethodsWe reviewed the data of children operated on for lateral condyle fractures between 2010 and 2020. Patients were classified as follows: 1. fractures treated with metallic (KW group), 2. fractures treated with resorbable implants (BR group). We compared the distribution of age, sex and fracture type in each group. Operative times of the two techniques were also recorded and compared. We analysed the X-rays taken one year after the injury and measured the following parameters: presence of possible non-union, varus or valgus deviation, lateral spur formation. Patients whose follow-up period was less than one year were excluded. For categorical data, group comparisons were performed with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, depending on the sample size. The evaluation of discrete variables was performed with Mann-Whitney U test.Results42 patients met the above criteria. We found 19 children in the Kirschner -wire + tansion band wire (KW) group and 23 in the Bioresorbable pin + tension band suture (BR) group. There were no significant differences between the study groups in terms of age, sex, left-right ratio, number of complications, operation time, number of Jacobs II and III cases or follow-up time. The operation time was on average 5 min longer in the bioresorbable group (K-wire mean = 62.1 min, Bioresorbable mean = 67 min), this difference, however, is not statistically significant (P = 0.177). In terms of minor and major complications, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. (P = 0.729).ConclusionsWe did not notice any difference between the complication rates of the two methods, so the real advantage of the absorbable implant technique is that no second intervention is necessary. The benefits of using biodegradable implants in various osteosynthesis techniques need further confirmation by randomised trials.Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

32 keywords...

hide…