Cargando…

Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study

BACKGROUND: Implant-related symptoms are the most common reason for reoperation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of midshaft clavicular fractures. Dual mini-fragment plate fixation is a relatively new solution that may decrease implant prominence while maintaining fixation strength...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Allis, J. Benjamin, Cheung, Edward C., Farrell, Eric D., Johnson, Eric E., Jeffcoat, Devon M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7418911/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33123660
http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.19.00043
_version_ 1783569778595594240
author Allis, J. Benjamin
Cheung, Edward C.
Farrell, Eric D.
Johnson, Eric E.
Jeffcoat, Devon M.
author_facet Allis, J. Benjamin
Cheung, Edward C.
Farrell, Eric D.
Johnson, Eric E.
Jeffcoat, Devon M.
author_sort Allis, J. Benjamin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Implant-related symptoms are the most common reason for reoperation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of midshaft clavicular fractures. Dual mini-fragment plate fixation is a relatively new solution that may decrease implant prominence while maintaining fixation strength and function. There are minimal published data comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes between single, superior-plate constructs and dual mini-fragment plate constructs in the fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures. We hypothesized that reducing plate size with the use of dual mini-fragment plating compared with standard, 3.5-mm, superior plating would minimize implant symptoms and the corresponding need for reoperation while still providing sufficient fixation to allow fracture-healing and return to function. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of 44 consecutive patients who underwent ORIF of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures utilizing either a single, 3.5-mm, superior plate construct (21 patients) or a dual, 2.7-mm and 2.4-mm, plate construct (23 patients). Outcomes at a minimum of 2 years were assessed. Primary outcome measures included reoperation for any reason and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section. RESULTS: There was a 100% union rate in both groups. None (0%) of the 23 patients who received the dual (2.7-mm and 2.4-mm) plate construct and 6 (29%) of the 21 patients who received the single (3.5-mm) plate construct underwent reoperation for implant-related symptoms. Using a Fisher exact test, the rate of reoperation was compared between the groups, and the difference was found to be significant (p = 0.008). Using an unpaired t test, the difference in mean ASES scores was not significant (p = 0.138) between the dual-plate group (98 of 100) and the single superior plate group (96 of 100) with retained implants. CONCLUSIONS: In our comparative retrospective series, dual fixation utilizing a 2.7-mm superior plate and a 2.4-mm anterior plate for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures was associated with a significantly lower rate of reoperation when compared with single, 3.5-mm, superior plate fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7418911
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74189112020-10-28 Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study Allis, J. Benjamin Cheung, Edward C. Farrell, Eric D. Johnson, Eric E. Jeffcoat, Devon M. JB JS Open Access Scientific Articles BACKGROUND: Implant-related symptoms are the most common reason for reoperation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of midshaft clavicular fractures. Dual mini-fragment plate fixation is a relatively new solution that may decrease implant prominence while maintaining fixation strength and function. There are minimal published data comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes between single, superior-plate constructs and dual mini-fragment plate constructs in the fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures. We hypothesized that reducing plate size with the use of dual mini-fragment plating compared with standard, 3.5-mm, superior plating would minimize implant symptoms and the corresponding need for reoperation while still providing sufficient fixation to allow fracture-healing and return to function. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the cases of 44 consecutive patients who underwent ORIF of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures utilizing either a single, 3.5-mm, superior plate construct (21 patients) or a dual, 2.7-mm and 2.4-mm, plate construct (23 patients). Outcomes at a minimum of 2 years were assessed. Primary outcome measures included reoperation for any reason and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section. RESULTS: There was a 100% union rate in both groups. None (0%) of the 23 patients who received the dual (2.7-mm and 2.4-mm) plate construct and 6 (29%) of the 21 patients who received the single (3.5-mm) plate construct underwent reoperation for implant-related symptoms. Using a Fisher exact test, the rate of reoperation was compared between the groups, and the difference was found to be significant (p = 0.008). Using an unpaired t test, the difference in mean ASES scores was not significant (p = 0.138) between the dual-plate group (98 of 100) and the single superior plate group (96 of 100) with retained implants. CONCLUSIONS: In our comparative retrospective series, dual fixation utilizing a 2.7-mm superior plate and a 2.4-mm anterior plate for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures was associated with a significantly lower rate of reoperation when compared with single, 3.5-mm, superior plate fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. 2020-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7418911/ /pubmed/33123660 http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.19.00043 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Scientific Articles
Allis, J. Benjamin
Cheung, Edward C.
Farrell, Eric D.
Johnson, Eric E.
Jeffcoat, Devon M.
Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_full Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_fullStr Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_full_unstemmed Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_short Dual Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_sort dual versus single-plate fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures: a retrospective comparative study
topic Scientific Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7418911/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33123660
http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.19.00043
work_keys_str_mv AT allisjbenjamin dualversussingleplatefixationofmidshaftclavicularfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT cheungedwardc dualversussingleplatefixationofmidshaftclavicularfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT farrellericd dualversussingleplatefixationofmidshaftclavicularfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT johnsonerice dualversussingleplatefixationofmidshaftclavicularfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT jeffcoatdevonm dualversussingleplatefixationofmidshaftclavicularfracturesaretrospectivecomparativestudy