Small Animal Orthopaedics Q&A 07

This question was provided by Manson Publishing as part of the OVAL Project. See more Small Animal Orthopaedics Q&A.

A radiograph of the elbow of a fivemonth-old, male Sharpei that jumped off of the porch and became non-weightbearing on this limb.

Question	Answer		Article
Describe the Salter–Harris classification scheme for physeal fractures.	The Salter–Harris classification scheme was developed based on the relationship of the fracture line to the growing cells of physis and the radiographic appearance of the fracture. The classification scheme was developed to assist physicians in prognosticating disturbances of continued physeal growth in children. Type I: the fracture traverses the physis. Type II: the fracture traverses the physis but also involves a portion of the metaphysis. Type III: the fracture traverses the physis but also involves a portion of the epiphysis. Type IV: the fracture involves a portion of the epiphysis, crosses the physis and also involves a portion of the metaphysis. Type V: these are compressive fractures of the physis. The prognosis for continued growth is favorable with experimentally created type I, II and III fractures. The prognosis for continual growth is less favorable with type IV fractures unless the physis is accurately realigned. Type V injuries are associated with crushing of the cartilagenous growth plate and carry a poor prognosis for continued growth. Unfortunately, the prognostic accuracy of the Salter–Harris classification scheme is not reliable in dogs sustaining traumatically induced physeal fractures. The classification scheme is more useful for describing the radiographic configuration of a particular physeal fracture.		[[|Link to Article]]
What is the Salter–Harris classification of this fracture?	Salter–Harris type IV fracture of the lateral portion of the humeral condyle.		[[|Link to Article]]