Comparative Analysis of Safety and Efficacy: Conventional Mediolateral Pinning vs. Dorgan's Lateral Cross-Pinning in

Muhammad Waqas Khan1, Shayan A Irfan1, Shahzeb Solangi1

  • 1Trauma and Orthopaedics, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, PAK.

Cureus
|November 3, 2025
PubMed

Insights

Dorgan

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic Surgery
  • Pediatric Orthopedics
  • Traumatology

Background:

  • Supracondylar fractures of the humerus (SFH) are common pediatric elbow injuries.
  • Pinning techniques for displaced SFH balance stability against ulnar nerve injury risk.
  • Lateral cross-pinning offers a potentially safer alternative.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the safety and efficacy of conventional mediolateral pinning versus Dorgan's lateral cross-pinning for pediatric SFH.
  • To evaluate functional outcomes and ulnar nerve impingement rates.
  • To provide evidence for optimal surgical technique selection.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines.
  • Searched PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Trial Register, and Google Scholar.
  • Included 4 studies (282 participants) of Gartland type II-IV SFH in children.

Main Results:

  • Dorgan's technique showed comparable carrying angle and range of motion to mediolateral pinning.
  • Dorgan's technique significantly reduced ulnar nerve impingement (RD = -0.09, p = 0.0002).
  • Comparable functional outcomes but potential radial nerve risks with Dorgan's technique.

Conclusions:

  • Dorgan's lateral cross-pinning is a safer alternative for pediatric SFH, significantly reducing ulnar nerve injury.
  • Both techniques offer similar functional results, but Dorgan's technique may have increased radial nerve risks and treatment time.
  • Individualized patient factors are crucial for selecting the optimal pinning method.

Related Concept Videos