Return to the Operating Room for Unplanned Pin Removal After Percutaneous Pinning of Supracondylar Humerus Fractures: A Retrospective Review

Sarah E. Lindsay, Lindsay Crawford, Stephanie Holmes, Allen A. Kadado, Ramiz Memon, Christopher D. Souder, Ishaan Swarup, Matthew Halsey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Pin migration is a common complication associated with closed reduced and percutaneous pinning (CRPP) of supracondylar humerus fractures (SCHF) in children. Though this complication occurs frequently, little work has been done to elicit circumstances surrounding this complication. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients with SCHF treated with percutaneous pins who needed to return to the operating room for pin removal. Methods: This was a multicenter study involving children treated at 6 pediatric tertiary care centers between 2010 and 2020. Retrospective chart review was performed to identify children aged 3 to 10 years of age with a diagnosis of a SCHF. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify patients who underwent CRPP of their injuries. CPT codes for deep hardware removal requiring procedural sedation or anesthesia were used to identify patients who needed to return to the operating room for hardware removal. Results: Between 2010 and 2020, 15 out of 7862 patients who were treated for SCHF at our 6 participating study centers experienced pin migration requiring a return to the operating room for pin removal, yielding a complication rate of 0.19%. Twelve (80%) of these injuries were Wilkins modification of the Gartland classification Type III, while the remaining injuries were Type II. 2-pin fixation constructs were used in nine (60%) children; 3-pin fixation constructs were used in 6 (40%) children. Pin migration was noted 23.2±7.0 days postoperatively at clinic follow-up. Four patients were noted to have multiple pins buried at follow-up. Four patients required 1-centimeter incisions for exposure of the buried pins, while surgeons were able to remove the buried pin with just a needle driver and blunt dissection in the remainder of patients. Conclusions: Pin migration is a common complication of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of SCHF. There is variation in pin site management to prevent migration in the absence of underlying risk factors. Level of Evidence: Level III.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E508-E512
JournalJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics
Volume43
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2023

Keywords

  • closed reduction percutaneous pinning (CRPP)
  • pin migration
  • supracondylar humerus fracture (SCHF)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Return to the Operating Room for Unplanned Pin Removal After Percutaneous Pinning of Supracondylar Humerus Fractures: A Retrospective Review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this