Cargando…
Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications
BACKGROUNDS: The aim of our study was to investigate failure rates of reconstruction plate and non-reconstruction plate, and find the best strategy for implant selection for different fracture types for midshaft clavicular fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-six consecutive patients...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6636002/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31311567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1259-x |
_version_ | 1783435984349691904 |
---|---|
author | Chiu, Yung-Cheng Huang, Kui-Chou Shih, Cheng-Min Lee, Kun-Tsan Chen, Kun-Hui Hsu, Cheng-En |
author_facet | Chiu, Yung-Cheng Huang, Kui-Chou Shih, Cheng-Min Lee, Kun-Tsan Chen, Kun-Hui Hsu, Cheng-En |
author_sort | Chiu, Yung-Cheng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUNDS: The aim of our study was to investigate failure rates of reconstruction plate and non-reconstruction plate, and find the best strategy for implant selection for different fracture types for midshaft clavicular fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-six consecutive patients with midshaft clavicular fractures who received open reduction and plate fixation during Jan 2012 to July 2017 were reviewed. The correlations between implant failure rates and risk factors including demographic data, fracture classifications, and implant types were analyzed. RESULTS: AO/OTA fracture classification and plate types are the most important factors affecting implant failure for midshaft clavicular fractures. Reconstruction plate had a significantly higher failure rate (53%) than that of non-reconstruction plates (3%) in comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures (P value < 0.01). However, the difference was not significant in AO/OTA 15-2A and 2B classifications. CONCLUSION: Patients with comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures treated with reconstruction plates had very high implant failure rates compared to non-reconstruction plates. We suggested that patients with comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures treated with reconstruction plates need more protection and more frequent follow-up in the postoperative period. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6636002 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66360022019-07-25 Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications Chiu, Yung-Cheng Huang, Kui-Chou Shih, Cheng-Min Lee, Kun-Tsan Chen, Kun-Hui Hsu, Cheng-En J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUNDS: The aim of our study was to investigate failure rates of reconstruction plate and non-reconstruction plate, and find the best strategy for implant selection for different fracture types for midshaft clavicular fractures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty-six consecutive patients with midshaft clavicular fractures who received open reduction and plate fixation during Jan 2012 to July 2017 were reviewed. The correlations between implant failure rates and risk factors including demographic data, fracture classifications, and implant types were analyzed. RESULTS: AO/OTA fracture classification and plate types are the most important factors affecting implant failure for midshaft clavicular fractures. Reconstruction plate had a significantly higher failure rate (53%) than that of non-reconstruction plates (3%) in comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures (P value < 0.01). However, the difference was not significant in AO/OTA 15-2A and 2B classifications. CONCLUSION: Patients with comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures treated with reconstruction plates had very high implant failure rates compared to non-reconstruction plates. We suggested that patients with comminuted midshaft clavicular (AO/OTA 15-2C) fractures treated with reconstruction plates need more protection and more frequent follow-up in the postoperative period. BioMed Central 2019-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6636002/ /pubmed/31311567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1259-x Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chiu, Yung-Cheng Huang, Kui-Chou Shih, Cheng-Min Lee, Kun-Tsan Chen, Kun-Hui Hsu, Cheng-En Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title | Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title_full | Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title_fullStr | Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title_short | Comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
title_sort | comparison of implant failure rates of different plates for midshaft clavicular fractures based on fracture classifications |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6636002/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31311567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1259-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chiuyungcheng comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications AT huangkuichou comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications AT shihchengmin comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications AT leekuntsan comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications AT chenkunhui comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications AT hsuchengen comparisonofimplantfailureratesofdifferentplatesformidshaftclavicularfracturesbasedonfractureclassifications |