Dataset Information

Bipolar clavicular fractures and treatment options.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Fractures of the clavicle are common injuries, accounting 2.6-4% of all fractures in adults. Of these fractures, 21-28% are lateral clavicle fractures and 2-3% are medial clavicle fractures. Bipolar clavicle fractures are defined as a lateral and medial fracture and are uncommon. There is no consensus on the treatment of these fractures. The aim of this study is to provide a treatment on bipolar clavicle fractures based on the current literature.

Methods

The electronic databases PubMed, the Cochrane library and EMBASE were searched up on September 25th, 2017. Two reviewers (KR and TG) independently screened titles and abstracts for their relevance. Studies designed to evaluate the outcomes of conservative and/or operative treatment of segmental bipolar clavicle fractures in adults (> 16 years) were included. Editorials and commentaries were excluded, as well as synthetic, cadaveric and animal studies. Primary outcomes considered were pain reduction and shoulder function. Secondary outcomes considered are complications.

Results

Ten studies reporting results from ten patients were included for the review. In most patients, if treated operatively, surgical treatment with the use of double plating was performed. Only in elderly patients conservative treatment was adopted. All included patients were pain free and had a full range of motion after 3-6 months. Only two case reports provided a DASH score, while in eight studies no functional outcome score was measured.

Conclusion

A missed bipolar fracture can complicate the clinical progress. Surgical management of these fractures may be necessary; however, the treatment of choice depends on the age of the patient, daily activities and comorbidity.

SUBMITTER: de Ruiter KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8476377 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The majority of clavicle fractures are midshaft injuries, although fractures of the distal or medial fragment also occur. The aim of this study was to review the current evidence on these injuries to help inform future treatment plans. Methods:We searched for studies comparing interventions for medial, midshaft, or distal clavicle fractures; however, we did not identify any comparative studies on medial fractures and performed a secondary search on this topic. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analyses, although this was not feasible with studies on medial fractures and we described their results qualitatively. Results:For midshaft fractures, we found statistically significant improvements in function and time to radiographic union with plating, an elastic stable intramedullary nail (ESIN), and the Sonoma CRx intramedullary nail over nonoperative treatments. Both plating and an ESIN also showed significantly lower risks of nonunion and malunion relative to nonoperative methods. For distal fractures, a locking plate (LP) with or without coracoclavicular (CC) suturing yielded significantly better outcomes over K-wires with or without tension bands, CC suturing alone, an LP with a CC screw, a hook plate, and a sling. For medial fractures, plating may result in more favorable functional and union-related outcomes, although implant irritation may occur. In addition, K-wires, tension bands, and a screw with sutures demonstrated success when plating was technically not feasible in a few cases, whereas treatment with a sling may result in reduced function and a higher risk of complications relative to surgery. Conclusion:This study can provide guidance on the management of medial, midshaft, and distal clavicle fractures. The current evidence suggests that plating, an ESIN, and a CRx intramedullary nail are all good options for midshaft fractures; an LP with or without CC suturing should be preferred for distal fractures; and plating is also acceptable for medial fractures, provided that the patient is deemed suitable for surgery and has the adequate bone stock and sufficiently sized medial fragment necessary to implant the device. Patient preferences for certain outcomes should be considered, which may result in different treatment recommendations.