BackgroundThe number of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures treated surgically is increasing and plate fixation is often the treatment modality of choice. The study quality and scientific levels of evidence at which possible complications of this treatment are presented vary greatly in literature.PurposesThe purpose of this systematic review is to assess the prevalence of complications concerning plate fixation of dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures.MethodsA computer-based search was carried out using EMBASE and PUBMED/MEDLINE. Studies included for review reported complications after plate fixation alone or in comparison to either treatment with intramedullary pin fixation and/or nonoperative treatment. Two quality assessment tools were used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. Included studies were ranked according to their levels of evidence.ResultsAfter study selection and reading of the full texts, 11 studies were eligible for final quality assessment. Nonunion and malunion rates were less than 10% in all analysed studies but one. The vast majority of complications seem to be implant related, with irritation or failure of the plate being consistently reported on in almost every study, on average ranging from 9 to 64%.ConclusionThe quantity of relevant high evidence studies is low. With low nonunion and malunion rates, plate fixation can be a safe treatment option for acute dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures, but complications related to the implant material requiring a second operation are frequent. Future prospective trials are needed to analyse the influence of various plate types and plate position on implant-related complications.
PurposeThe optimal surgical approach for displaced midshaft clavicle fracture remains controversial. The objective of this systematic review is to compare functional outcome and complications after plate fixation and intramedullary fixation for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.MethodsA computer aided search of PUBMED and Embase was carried out on January 11th 2011. Every study that was published in the English, German, French or Dutch language was considered for inclusion. A total of four studies could be included of which two compared intramedullary fixation versus plate fixation, and two compared intramedullary fixation and plate fixation versus conservative treatment for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. Studies that compared plate fixation with intramedullary fixation in patients with fresh unilateral displaced midshaft clavicle fractures were included. Dislocation or displacement had to be mentioned in the inclusion criteria of the study for inclusion in this review. The modified version of the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group’s former quality assessment tool was used. Furthermore, the studies included were scored according to the GRADE approach to assess the quality. The chosen studies were summarised in a data-extraction form. Because of the different study designs and characteristics data were summarised separately for each study.ConclusionsHigh quality evidence from one study and low quality evidence from three studies showed no difference in functional outcome or complications after plate fixation or intramedullary fixation for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.
The patients in the plate-fixation group recovered faster than the patients in the intramedullary nailing group, but the groups had similar results at six months postoperatively and the time of final follow-up. The rate of complications requiring revision surgery was low. Implant-related complications occurred frequently and could often be treated by implant removal.
PurposeThe incidence of operative treatment of dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures (DMCF) is rising due to unsatisfactory results after non-operative treatment. Knowledge of complications is important for selection of the surgical technique and preoperative patient counselling. The aim of this study is to compare complications after plate fixation and elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) with a titanium elastic nail (TEN) for DMCF.MethodsA retrospective analysis of our surgical database was performed. From January 2005 to January 2010, 90 patients with DMCF were treated with plate fixation or ESIN. Complications were evaluated in both treatment groups and subsequently compared.ResultsSeven implant failures occurred in six patients (14 %) of the plate group and one implant failure (2.1 %) was seen in the ESIN group (p = 0.051). Major revision surgery was performed in five cases in the plate group (11.6 %) and in one case (2.1 %) in the ESIN group (p = 0.100). Three refractures (7.0 %) were observed in the plate group after removal of the implant against none in the ESIN group (p = 0.105). Six minor revisions (13 %) were reported in the ESIN group and none were reported in the plate group (p = 0.027).ConclusionsCompared to other studies we report higher rates of refracture (7.0 %), major revision surgery (11.6 %) and implant failure (14.0 %) after plate fixation. The frequency of implant failures differed almost significantly for patients treated with plate fixation compared to ESIN. Furthermore, a tendency towards refracture after implant removal and major revision surgery after plate fixation was observed.
Background:The number of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures treated surgically is increasing, and open reduction and intramedullary fixation is an emerging surgical treatment option. The study quality and scientific levels of published evidence in which possible complications of this treatment are presented vary greatly. Methods:We performed systematic computer-based searches of EMBASE and PubMed/MEDLINE. Studies included for review reported complications after intramedullary fixation alone or in comparison to either treatment with plate fixation and/or nonoperative treatment. The Level of Evidence rating and Quality Assessment Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. Included studies were ranked according to their levels of evidence.Results: Six articles were eligible for inclusion and final quality assessment; 3 studies were graded the highest level of evidence. Major complications like bone-healing problems and deep infections requiring implant removal were reported at a rate no higher than 7%. Reported rates for minor complications, such as wound infection and implant irritation that could be resolved without further surgery, were as high as 31%. Conclusion:The noted rates for major complications requiring additional surgery were low, but implant-related problems that require additional surgery might present with high prevalence. Owing to routine implant removal, treatment with intramedullary fixation often requires an additional surgical procedure.Contexte : Le nombre de fractures déplacées de la diaphyse claviculaire traitées chirurgicalement est en hausse et la réduction ouverte avec fixation intramédullaire est une option chirurgicale émergente. La qualité des études et le niveau scientifique des preuves publiées concernant les complications possibles de ce traitement varient beaucoup.Méthodes : Nous avons procédé à une interrogation systématique des bases de données informatiques EMBASE et PubMed/MEDLINE. Les études retenues pour examen faisaient état de complications après le recours à la fixation intramédullaire seule ou comparée à un traitement par plaque et vis et(ou) un traitement non chirurgical. Nous avons utilisé le classement par niveaux de preuve ou un outil d'évaluation qualitative pour mesurer la qualité méthodologique des études. Les études retenues ont été classées selon leur niveau de preuve.Résultats : Nous avons retenu 6 articles pour inclusion et évaluation finale de leur qualité; 3 des études présentaient le niveau de preuve le plus élevé. Les complications majeures, notamment des problèmes de cicatrisation de l'os et d'infection profonde nécessitant le retrait de l'implant, ont été signalés selon un taux n'excédant pas 7 %. Les taux de complications mineures rapportées, telles qu'infection de plaie et irritation due à l'implant, qui ont pu rentrer dans l'ordre sans autre chirurgie, se sont élevés à 31 %. Conclusion :Les taux signalés de complications majeures ayant nécessité une autre chirurgie ont été faibles, mais les problèmes relatifs aux implants ay...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.