Comparison of 2 Different Fixation Implants for Operative Treatment of Mid-Shaft Clavicle Fractures: A Retrospective Study

Efficacy of intramedullary bridge fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures: a retrospective analysis of a novel technique

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy of a novel intramedullary fixation technique using the ortho-bridge system (OBS) for midshaft clavicle fractures.

METHODS

A total of 63 patients were included in this study: 35 underwent plate internal fixation (LP group) and 28 underwent OBS intramedullary fixation (OBS group). Surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, fracture healing time, removal of the internal fixation agent, visual analog scale (VAS) score for shoulder pain, Constant-Murley shoulder score and complication occurrence were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Preoperative general data, such as sex, age and fracture type, were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, the OBS group exhibited better outcomes than the LP group exhibited in terms of surgical time, intraoperative blood loss and total incision length (P < 0.05). Additionally, the OBS group exhibited a significantly shorter fracture healing time and internal-fixation removal time than the LP group exhibited (P < 0.05). The VAS scores on postoperative day 1, week 1, month 1 and month 3 were lower in the OBS group than in the LP group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the Constant-Murley shoulder scores at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively were higher in the OBS group than in the LP group (P < 0.05), with no significant difference at 1 year after surgery (P > 0.05). None of the patients in the OBS group experienced scarring of the surgical incision, and 6 patients in the LP group experienced scarring of the surgical incision. Finally, the complication incidence in the OBS group was lower than that in the LP group.

CONCLUSION

For midshaft clavicle fractures, OBS intramedullary fixation is better than locking-plate internal fixation because it led to less trauma, a faster recovery, better efficacy, and better esthetic outcomes and comfort. Therefore, this technique may have potential as a novel treatment for midshaft clavicle fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective observational study.

Functional outcomes and complications of plate fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures by type and location: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Various plate types are used in the surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. These plates can be positioned in different locations on the clavicle, although no studies to date have elucidated optimal plate type and location of fixation. This systematic review compares the functional outcomes and complications in the management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using plate fixation by stratifying by both plate type and location.

Methods

A systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted to identify all papers reporting functional outcomes, union rates, and/or complications using plates for the management of midshaft clavicle fractures. Multiple databases and trial registries were searched from inception until March 2022. A meta-analysis was conducted for functional outcomes and type of complication, stratified by plate type (locking, compression, or reconstruction) and location (superior or anteroinferior). Pooled estimates of functional outcome scores and incidence of complications were calculated using a random effects model. Risk of bias and quality were assessed using the risk of bias version 2 and ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tools. The confidence in estimates were rated and described according to the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) working group.

Results

Forty-five studies were included in the systematic review and 43 were included in the meta-analysis. Depending on plate type and location, pooled Constant-Murley Scores ranged from 89.23 to 93.48 at 12 months. Nonunion rates were 3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1-6) for superior locking plates (GRADE Low). Rates of any complication (nonunion, hardware failure, hardware irritation, wound dehiscence, keloid, superficial infection, deep infection, delayed union, malunion, and/or persistent pain) by plate type and location ranged from 3% to 17% (GRADE Very Low to Moderate). Superior compression plates had the highest incidence of any complications (17% [95% CI 5-44], GRADE Very Low), while anterior inferior compression plates had the lowest incidence of any complication (3% [95% CI 0-15], GRADE Very Low). Hardware irritation was the most reported individual complication for superior locking plates and superior compression plates, 11% (95% CI 7-17, GRADE Low) and 11% (95% CI 3-33, GRADE Very Low), respectively.

Conclusion

Although most studies were of low quality, studies reporting functional outcomes generally showed good functional results and similar incidence of any complication regardless of plate type and location. There is no evidence of a plate and location combination to optimize patient functional outcomes or complications. We were unable to reliably evaluate union rates or individual complications for most plate types stratified by location.

Low rate of secondary surgery and implant removal following superior, precontoured plating of midshaft clavicle fractures

Background

Surgical fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures with a single 3.5 mm superior clavicular plate has been associated with a high rate of hardware removal due to symptomatic hardware. Because of this, dual-plating techniques with lower-profile implants have been proposed. However, dual-plating systems have disadvantages, including increased cost and increased surgical morbidity. The aim of this study was to define the rate of symptomatic hardware removal for all midshaft clavicle fractures.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed information on all patients from 2014 to 2018 at a single level 1 trauma institution with surgeries performed by two fellowship-trained orthopedic trauma surgeons. Documented removal of hardware and the reason for removal were recorded. We then contacted all patients at their listed telephone number to confirm the hardware was still in place and to administer patient outcome questionnaires. If patients did not answer, attempts were made to contact them multiple times on multiple days. Those who were not reached but had documented hardware removal were included in the total number of patients with hardware removal.

Results

The search revealed 158 patients, of whom 89 (61.8%) were included in the study. Average follow up was 4.09 years (range 2.02-6.50 years). Five patients (5.56%) underwent hardware removal. Removal was for symptomatic or irritating hardware in two of these patients (2.22%). Average abbreviated Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 6.27, and average American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score was 93.6.

Conclusion

In our series, the rate of symptomatic hardware removal was 2.22%, well below reported removal rates. Hardware removal rates for prominent symptomatic superior clavicular plates may be significantly lower than previously reported, and these fractures may be adequately treated with a single, superior plate.

Bridged combined fixation system versus locking plate in the treatment of patients with implant periprosthetic refracture following proximal femoral fracture surgery: A retrospective observational study

Locking plate (LP) re-fixation is mainly used to treat postoperative implant periprosthetic refractures; however, the extensive trauma and the fixation form of LP make the operation difficult. The bridge combined fixation system (BCFS) is a new clip-rod internal fixation system, and its clinical application is in its infancy. To compare the clinical effect of BCFS and LP in the treatment of geriatric postoperative implant periprosthetic refracture following proximal femoral fracture surgery. Thirty-two patients (14 with BCFS and 18 with LP) with postoperative implant periprosthetic refracture following proximal femoral fracture surgery, who underwent surgery in our hospital, were analyzed retrospectively. The incision length, operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative hospital stay, fracture healing time and complications of each patient were recorded. Regular radiographs were taken after the operation to evaluate the fracture reduction and fixation. All the patients were followed for 12 months to evaluate their limb function by Johner-Wruhs scoring criteria. The patients were followed for an average of 24.1 months, and all achieved bony union, with no complications such as infection, nonunion, and internal fixation instrument falling off and loosening after the operation. Delayed healing occurred in two cases in the LP group. The average value of surgical incision length, operation time, postoperative hospitalization time and fracture healing time in the BCFS group were significantly smaller than those in the LP group, accompanied by a decrease in intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage volumes (P < .05). The rate of limb function in the BCFS group (85.7%) was higher than that in the LP group (83.3%), with no significance (P > .05). The BCFS in the refracture around the implant of the proximal femoral fracture exhibited many advantages such as simple operation, strong plasticity, effective reduction of surgical trauma, promotion of fracture healing and early functional rehabilitation, etc, making it an advantageous clinical application.

Analysis of Efficacy, Complications, and Inflammatory Reactions of Bridge Combined Internal Fixation System for Periarticular Fractures of the Shoulder

Objective

The aim of the present research is to analyze the impact of the bridge combined internal fixation system (BCFS) on efficacy, complications, and inflammatory reactions of periarticular fractures of the shoulder.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 100 patients with periarticular fractures of the shoulder admitted between January 2016 and January 2020. Patients were assigned to the observation group (OG) and control group (CG) according to different treatment schemes, with 50 cases in each group. Patients in OG were intervened by BCFS, while those in CG were routinely given plate fixation. The treatment outcome, complications, and inflammatory reaction of the two groups were compared.

Results

The results showed better treatment outcome, shoulder joint function recovery, and inflammatory reaction alleviation of OG compared with CG. Besides, statistically shorter fracture healing and hospitalization time as well as fewer complications were determined in OG.

Conclusion

These results demonstrate that compared with the plate fixation system, BCFS can significantly improve the surgical efficacy and healing efficiency and alleviate the inflammatory response of patients, with a low complication rate, all of which contribute to faster recovery of periarticular fractures of the shoulder. Hence, BCFS is an ideal choice for periarticular fractures of the shoulder that deserves clinical promotion.