Abstract

Purpose: The British Orthopaedic Association Standards for Trauma-4 includes pediatric Gustilo–Anderson type I upper limb open fractures and recommends surgical debridement as the preferred method of treatment. The reported incidence of fracture-related infection is low in patients with this injury pattern and the evidence supporting debridement is therefore weak. The aim of this systematic review is to compare infection rates between non-operative management and operative debridement in children with Gustilo I upper limb fractures who did not require surgical fixation. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligibility criteria included patients <18 years with Gustilo–Anderson type I upper limb fractures managed with either antibiotics alone or with operative debridement. Patients in whom the fracture was stabilized were excluded, and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies—of Interventions tool was used to evaluate bias. Results: Eleven, predominantly retrospective studies were identified, involving 537 patients with fractures including 466 forearm, 70 wrist, and one humerus. A non-operative management strategy was used in 293 patients with one superficial infection (0.3%). Operative debridement was used in 244 patients with one superficial infection (0.4%). Conclusion: The optimal management of Gustilo–Anderson type I pediatric upper limb fractures is unclear. Based on the current evidence base, surgical debridement does not appear to reduce the rate of infection. The decision to manage these injuries aggressively should therefore be individualized to consider patient age, mechanism, and clinical extent of injury. Level of evidence: level II.