Physeal fracture in the wrist and hand due to stress injury in a child climber: A case report

Stressed or fractured: MRI differentiating indicators of physeal injury

OBJECTIVE

To identify MRI findings that can indicate chronic physeal stress injury and differentiate it from acute Salter-Harris (SH) fracture of the pediatric knee or wrist.

METHODS

IRB-approved retrospective study of consecutively selected knee and wrist MRIs from 32 athletes with chronic physeal stress injury and 30 children with acute SH fracture. MRI characteristics (physeal patency, physeal thickening, physeal signal intensity (SI), continuity of the zone of provisional calcification (ZPC), integrity of the periosteum and/or perichondrium, pattern of periphyseal and soft tissue edema signal, and joint effusion) were compared.

RESULTS

Forty-eight chronic physeal stress injuries (mean age 13.1 years [8.2-17.5 years]) and 35 SH fractures (mean age 13.3 years [5.1-16.0 years]) were included. Any physeal thickening was more common with chronic stress injury (98% vs 77%, p = 0.003). Abnormal physeal SI was more common with SH fractures (91% vs 67%, p = 0.008). ZPC discontinuity strongly suggested chronic stress injury (79% vs 49%, p < 0.004). Periosteal and/or perichondrial elevation or rupture and soft tissue edema characterized most of the acute SH fractures (p < 0.001) and were seen only in 1 chronic stress injury (< 2%). While periphyseal edema was not significantly different in the two groups (p = 0.890), a joint effusion was associated with acute SH fracture (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Chronic physeal stress injury of the pediatric knee and wrist shows higher incidence of ZPC discontinuity and focal physeal thickening compared to SH fracture, reflecting disruption in normal endochondral ossification. However, these findings can overlap in the 2 groups. Periosteal and/or perichondrial injury, soft tissue edema signal, and joint effusion strongly suggest SH fracture and are rarely present with chronic stress injury.

Minimal intervention (removable splint or bandage) for the management of distal forearm fractures in children and adolescents: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Distal forearm fractures are common in children and adolescents with a spectrum of severity. There are fracture patterns that are suitable for minimal interventions, such as a splint or bandage. The objective of this review was to identify which types of paediatric distal forearm fractures can be safely and effectively managed with a removable splint or bandage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review was performed. Databases searched were PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL; two trial registries were also searched. All primary study designs with children <18 years of age with a distal forearm fracture that was managed in either a splint or bandage were included. Quality of evidence was determined using the GRADE tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-two eligible articles were included from 20 unique studies: 12 randomised controlled trials, seven cohort studies and a case report. Twelve studies focused solely on buckle/torus fractures, with remaining studies including other fracture types, such as incomplete ('greenstick'), complete ('transverse'), or physeal (Salter-Harris). Twelve studies reported that participants with either bandage or splint had appropriate reduction in pain and recovery of function at completion of follow-up for all fracture types. All 20 studies reported minimal adverse events related to fracture management. One study reported worsening angulation with bandage immobilisation for complete fractures in two participants, which required manipulation under anaesthesia.

DISCUSSION

There is high quality evidence to support the safety and effectiveness of a splint or bandage for treatment of distal radius buckle and non-displaced incomplete fractures. Several studies supported the use of minimal interventions for various distal radius cortical breach fracture types, with good outcomes, but were limited by heterogeneity (methodology, interventions, outcome measures, reference standard) and potential bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Included studies confirmed the inherent stability of buckle fractures. The current literature gap to support minimal interventions for a range of other paediatric distal forearm fracture types was highlighted. High-quality evidence with well-designed, large, multicentre randomised control trials in defined age groups is required to identify which paediatric distal forearm fractures can be safely and effectively managed with either a removable splint or bandage.

Inconsistencies and Imprecision in the Nomenclature Used to Describe Primary Periphyseal Stress Injuries: Towards a Better Understanding

Stress injuries involving the epiphyseal-physeal-metaphyseal complex affecting the extremities of child and adolescent athletes were first described in the early 1950s. Initially observed in Little League baseball players, these injuries are now known to affect skeletally immature athletes in a variety of sports that involve high-impact repetitive overuse activities. Collectively known as primary periphyseal stress injuries, they may affect the long bones around the shoulder, elbow, wrist, hand, hip, knee, ankle, and foot of young athletes. These injuries respond well to timely treatment and relative rest, while non-compliance with non-operative treatment can produce skeletal growth disruption and resultant limb deformity. A major concern raised from the existing literature on primary periphyseal stress injuries is the long history of inconsistent and imprecise terminology used to describe these injuries. A variety of terms have been used to describe primary periphyseal stress injuries, including those which potentially misinform regarding who may be affected by these injuries and the true nature and pathophysiologic mechanisms involved. These imprecisions and inconsistencies arise, at least in part, from a misunderstanding or incomplete understanding of the nature and mechanism of primary periphyseal stress injuries. In this article, we examine the inconsistent and imprecise nomenclature historically used to describe primary periphyseal stress injuries. We also offer a novel framework for understanding the pathophysiologic mechanisms behind these injuries, and provide suggestions for more standard use of terminology and further research moving forward.