Comparison of radiological and clinical outcomes, complications, and implant removals in anatomically pre-contoured clavicle plates versus reconstruction plates - a propensity score matched retrospective cohort study of 106 patients

Background

Plate fixation is frequently used to treat displaced midshaft clavicular fractures, however the ideal plate choice remains subject to discussion; reconstruction locking compression plates (RLCPs) are cheaper and can be easily contoured, whereas anatomically pre-contoured locking compression plates (ALCPs) are thought to provide better stability and therefore lower rates of mechanical failure.

To compare the incidence of mechanical failures, functional and radiological outcomes in patients with midshaft clavicular fractures treated with ALCPs versus RLCPs.

Methods

A propensity score matched retrospective cohort study was conducted across two centers. One hundred and six consecutively recruited patients with displaced midshaft clavicular fractures, who were treated with plate fixation and had a minimum follow-up of 6 months, were matched on gender, age, fracture grading, energy of injury, and fracture location. The resulting groups included 53 ALCP-treated fractures and 53 matched controls treated with RLCPs.

Results

During a mean follow-up of 20.5 months, there were no implant deformities in the ALCP group whereas the RLCP group had 6 patients (11.3%, p = 0.012) with implant deformities (5 occurrences of plate bending with fracture union, and 1 plate breakage with nonunion). Despite the higher rate of plate deformities in the RLCP group, there were no statistically significant differences in number of patients recovering full shoulder range of motion (ALCP 90.6%, RLCP 88.7%, p = 0.751), incidence of rest pain (ALCP 13.2%, RLCP 9.4%, p = 0.542), or implant removals (ALCP 49.1%, RLCP 56.6%, p = 0.439).

Conclusion

ALCPs may be superior to RLCPs in terms of implant stability but appear to produce similar clinical results.

Operative Versus Non-operative Management of Mid-diaphyseal Clavicle Fractures in the Skeletally Immature Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of operative vs non-operative management of mid-diaphyseal clavicle fractures in the skeletally immature population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Traditionally, skeletally immature clavicle fractures have been managed non-operatively. However, there has been an increasing trend towards operative management with a lack of evidence indicating its effectiveness.

METHODS

Two reviewers searched three online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed), independently and in duplicates, for literature comparing the outcomes and complications of operative versus non-operative management in skeletally-immature patients (defined as birth to 18 years of age) with a middiaphyseal clavicle fracture. Where possible, risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were combined using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Seven studies, containing 522 skeletally immature patients (with 528 mid-diaphyseal clavicle fractures) with an age range of 8 to 18 years, with 148 patients undergoing operative management and 380 patients undergoing non-operative management, were included. Across the 6 studies that reported gender (N = 444), there were 335 males and 109 females. Patients were followed up from 2 weeks to 3.7 years across five studies (N = 201 patients) that reported follow-up time. There was no significant difference in the time to achieve union (p = 0.1), the time to return to activity (p = 0.09), and the overall complication rate (p = 0.50) between the operative and the non-operative groups. There is no significant difference between operative and non-operative management of skeletally immature mid-diaphyseal clavicle fractures. Clinical equipoise exists to study this further by means of a prospective, randomized, blinded control trial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review and meta-analysis of level II, III, and IV.

Management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in adolescent patients using intramedullary flexible nails: A case series

INTRODUCTION

Clavicle fractures are common injuries in adolescent patients. In this study we present our technique and results for treating non-comminuted displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using flexible intra medullary nails.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data using the electronic medical record was performed. Adolescent patients presenting to a level one pediatric trauma center with acute displaced non comminuted clavicular shaft fractures who were treated with intra medullary flexible nails were included in this study.

RESULTS

Seven adolescent patients with non-comminuted displaced mid shaft clavicle fractures were treated with flexible nails over a period of five and half years with an average follow up time of 10 months. The average age was 14.6 years (range 14-16), and a 2 mm nail was used in all cases. Closed reduction was obtained in five cases with only two cases needing open reduction to pass the nail. One patient had skin breakdown over the nail entry and had the nail removed in clinic two months after surgery, all other patients healed with no complication. Sports and full shoulder activity were allowed when radiographic healing was seen at an average 8 weeks. Implant removal was performed four of the seven patients.

CONCLUSION

Flexible intramedullary nailing is an effective minimally invasive method for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in the adolescent population. The surgeon should be aware that a 2 mm nail is likely the optimal diameter, and the nail is difficult to pass beyond the lateral 2-3 cm of the distal segment due to canal narrowing, but passage further than this is not necessary to achieve stability and union. Following these pearls will allow the surgeon to successfully perform the procedure.

Midshaft clavicle fractures with associated ipsilateral acromioclavicular joint dislocations: Incidence and risk factors

INTRODUCTION

Simultaneous ipsilateral clavicle and acromioclavicular (AC) joint injury have been infrequently reported in the literature at this time. The purpose of this study was to assess incidence as well as assess risk factors for this dual injury pattern.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database (Level III evidence), evaluating 383 adult patients without previous shoulder girdle injury or trauma with a minimum 1-year follow-up who sustained a displaced diaphyseal clavicle fracture. All patients in the study underwent either nonoperative management or surgical reduction and stabilization of a diaphyseal clavicle fracture with a plate and screw construct. Study subjects were followed with serial radiographs. Clavicle and shoulder radiographs, as well as chest radiographs and contralateral films in questionable cases, were used to assess for acromioclavicular joint injury in both operative and nonoperative groups. Additional data was collected on concurrent injuries, patient demographics, fracture characteristics, fixation techniques, surgical/post-operative data, and operative or nonoperative treatment.

RESULTS

We found that 13/183 (7.1%) of patients undergoing fixation of a diaphyseal clavicle fracture had an ipsilateral AC joint injury, while 13/200 (6.5%) of patients undergoing conservative management had an ipsilateral AC joint injury. Critical analysis of the data revealed that presence of ipsilateral scapular body fractures, and a likely incidental association with superior plating fixation, were associated with an increased rate of this injury pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Ipsilateral clavicle fracture and AC joint injury is much more common than traditionally believed, with an incidence of 6.8% overall. It is unknown how the presence of an associated AC injury influences outcome, as AC injury was not universally symptomatic.