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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chiu, Yung-Cheng, Huang, Kui-Chou, Shih, Cheng-Min, Lee, Kun-Tsan, Chen, Kun-Hui, Hsu, Cheng-En
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