You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Orthopaedics
Paediatric bilateral ‘floating elbow’
  1. Karthick Rangasamy,
  2. Shivam Maheshwari,
  3. Akash Ghosh and
  4. Nirmal Raj Gopinathan
  1. Orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
  1. Correspondence to Dr Shivam Maheshwari; shivammaheshwari95{at}gmail.com

Abstract

A child sustained an ipsilateral supracondylar humerus (SCH) and distal both-bone forearm fractures bilaterally, in addition to facial injuries, following a fall from height. He was managed surgically by closed reduction and pinning for both SCH and distal end radius fractures bilaterally. At the final follow-up, all the fractures had united uneventfully, and he had no functional limitations or cosmetic concerns. We conclude that a floating elbow in the paediatric population is an uncommon injury, and the bilateral scenario is even rarer. One should be vigilant for compartment syndrome; early surgical fixation may give better results.

  • Elbow fracture
  • Elbow instability
  • Trauma
  • Orthopaedic and trauma surgery

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2023-258311

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors The following authors were responsible for drafting of the text, sourcing and editing of clinical images, investigation results, drawing original diagrams and algorithms, and critical revision for important intellectual content: SM, AG, KR, NRG. The following authors gave final approval of the manuscript: KR, NRG.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.