RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Operative treatment of medial epicondyle fractures can be performed in either a supine or prone position. In the supine position, fracture visualization is sometimes difficult due to the posterior position of the medial epicondyle. However, the prone position requires extensive patient repositioning but may improve visualization. The purpose of this study was to compare the results and complications between the supine and prone position when treating medial epicondyle fractures. METHODS: In a retrospective chart review, patients below 18 who underwent open reduction and internal fixation of an acute medial epicondyle fracture from January 2011 to August 2019 were identified. Patients with <2 months follow-up and concomitant fractures were excluded. Surgical variables, outcomes, and complications were recorded and compared between the supine and prone positions. RESULTS: Sixteen surgeons treated the 204 patients evaluated in this study. The mean age was 11.7 years. In all, 122 (60%) patients were treated in the supine position, and 82 (40%) in the prone position. The mean time in the room was 113 minutes in the supine group, and 141 minutes in the prone group (P<0.001). Tourniquet time was similar between groups (P=0.4). Displacement of the fracture on the first postoperative x-rays was 2.06 mm for the supine position and 1.1 mm for the prone position (P<0.001). We also found good interobserver and intraobserver reliability for the measurements. Five patients (2.5%) required reoperation due to stiffness, 2 patients due to nonunion, 1 patient due to tardy ulnar nerve palsy, and 53 (26%) had surgical hardware removal. The surgical position was not associated with complications or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: While the prone position requires additional time in the operating room, presumably for positioning, the length of the surgical procedure itself does not differ between the 2 positions. Although the trend of the surgeons at our center is towards the prone position, with surgeons that try it usually doing all their subsequent cases that way, both positions provide excellent clinical outcomes with minimal complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic level III-retrospective cohort study.