Dataset Information

Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation for the Treatment Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: The two commonly performed surgical techniques used to repair displaced midshaft clavicle fractures are plate fixation or intramedullary nailing; however, despite recent evidence, the optimal method to treat such fractures remains a continued topic of debate. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate long term function, complications, and operative duration in adult patients receiving intramedullary nailing in comparison to plating. Seven RCTs and three quasi-randomized trials were included. No significant difference was found in long-term function between the two groups (MD: -0.66, 95% CI: -2.03 to 0.71, I(2)?=?62%, p?=?0.34). Patients who received plating had a 2.19 times increased risk of treatment failure, but this failed to reach significance (95% CI: 0.93 to 5.15, I(2)?=?0%, p?=?0.07). The risk of non-operative complications was 2.11 times higher in patients who received plating and this reached statistical significance (95% CI: 1.38 to 3.23, I(2)?=?53%, p?=?0.0006). Finally, plating significantly prolonged operative duration by 20.16?minutes (95% CI: 16.87 to 23.44, I(2)?=?56%, p?

SUBMITTER: Hussain N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5071841 | biostudies-other | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation for the Treatment Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Hussain Nasir N Sermer Corey C Prusick Parker J PJ Banfield Laura L Atrey Amit A Bhandari Mohit M

Scientific reports 20161020

The two commonly performed surgical techniques used to repair displaced midshaft clavicle fractures are plate fixation or intramedullary nailing; however, despite recent evidence, the optimal method to treat such fractures remains a continued topic of debate. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate long term function, complications, and operative duration in adult patients receiving intramedullary nailing in comparison to plating. Seven RCTs and three qua ...[more]

PMID: 27762393

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSurgical management of completely displaced midshaft fractures of the clavicle is becoming more frequent, although long-term follow-up with Level-I evidence is scarce. Plate fixation (PF) of comminuted fractures provides faster functional recovery than elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN). The 12-month follow-up of this randomized controlled trial, published previously, found no clinical differences at that time on the group level, but subtle differences on the subgroup level indicated that the results after closed ESIN were better than those after open ESIN. The primary aim of the study reported here was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes and sequelae after open reduction with those after closed reduction and to help surgeons develop a treatment strategy of either PF or ESIN for selected patients.MethodsAt a median follow-up of 66 months (range, 49 to 89 months), the 123 patients in the original study were invited to an online secure survey. We used the survey results to compare the PF and ESIN treatment arms and to perform predetermined subgroup analyses of closed compared with open ESIN in relation to Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, pain assessment, and implant removal.ResultsThe questionnaire was completed by 114 (93%) of the 123 patients. There were no differences between the 2 treatment arms with regard to the DASH score (ESIN, 3.1 ± 7.0 and PF, 3.7 ± 7.5; p = 0.9). The 27 patients who had been treated with closed ESIN had a significantly superior DASH score compared with the 27 patients who had been treated with open ESIN (closed, 0.7 ± 1.4 and open, 5.2 ± 8.9; p = 0.015) and compared with the patients who had been treated with PF (closed ESIN, 0.7 ± 1.4 and PF, 3.9 ± 7.5; p = 0.002). Patients who had been treated with closed ESIN also reported fewer sequelae than patients who had been treated with open ESIN or PF.ConclusionsThe results of this study, combined with those of our prior 1-year follow-up of the same patients, indicate that it seems to be advantageous to perform closed ESIN. The long-term results after PF were similar to those after open ESIN, but PF resulted in faster functional recovery and fewer patients needing to have the implant removed. Therefore, if open reduction is necessary for a comminuted fracture, it seems that the advantages of the minimally invasive ESIN procedure are lost, and the surgeon should consider conversion to PF.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:IntroductionOpen reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures is associated with higher union rates and earlier functional recovery. However, ORIF with plate fixation is associated with complications including implant irritation and implant failure. Dual plate fixation provides fixation in orthogonal planes, and uses a lower profile fixation technique in comparison to pre-contoured and surgeon-contoured small-fragment locking plates, which may be more prominent. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to summarize outcomes and complications associated with surgical fixation of displaced acute midshaft clavicle fractures with dual plate fixation.MethodsUsing a predetermined study protocol in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 2020 to identify studies reporting outcomes in acute midshaft clavicle fractures treated with dual plate fixation. All clinical studies which reported on outcomes of dual plating in patients with acute midshaft clavicle fractures were included. Baseline demographics, plate fixation constructs, fracture union rates, implant removal rates, maintenance of reduction, symptomatic implant rates, wound complications, and functional outcomes were extracted. All extracted data were recorded, and descriptive statistics were summarized. Meta-analysis was performed on fracture union rates and implant removal rates using random-effects modeling using Mantel-Haenszel weighting.ResultsOur literature search identified 2226 unique abstracts, of which eight studies met our study inclusion criteria following review. A total of 278 patients made up of 79.8% male with an average age of 36.0 years were included. The overall dual plate implant removal rate was 4.2% with excellent rates of union reported. Moreover, single plate fixation was associated with a 3.9-fold increased implant removal rate compared to dual plate fixation.ConclusionResults from this systematic review demonstrate that ORIF of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using a dual plate fixation technique is a viable option to reduce the incidence of implant removal, without negatively impacting the rate of fracture union.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level III.

Project description:Background. Plate fixation and intramedullary fixation are the most commonly used surgical treatment options for mid-shaft clavicle fractures; the latter method has demonstrated better performance in some studies. Objectives. Our aim was to critically review and summarize the literature comparing the outcomes of mid-shaft clavicle fracture treatment with plate fixation or intramedullary fixation to identify the better approach. Search Methods. Potential academic articles were identified from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966-2015.5), PubMed (1966-2015.5), EMBASE (1980-2015.5) and ScienceDirect (1966-2015.5). Gray studies were identified from the references of the included literature. Selection Criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing plate fixation and intramedullary fixation for mid-shaft clavicle fracture were included. Data Collection and Analysis. Two reviewers performed independent data abstraction. The I (2) statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. A fixed- or random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Results. Six RCTs and nine non-RCTs were retrieved, including 513 patients in the intramedullary fixation group and 521 patients in the plating group. No significant differences in terms of the union rate and shoulder function were found between the groups. Patients in the intramedullary fixation group had a shorter operative time, less blood loss, smaller wound size, and shorter union time than those in the plating group. With respect to complications, significant differences were identified for all complications and major complications (wound infection, nonunion, implant failures, transient brachial plexopathy, and pain after 6 months). Similar secondary complications (symptomatic hardware, hardware irritation, prominence, numbness, hypertrophic callus) were observed in both groups. Conclusions. Intramedullary fixation may be superior to plate fixation in the treatment of mid-shaft clavicle fractures, with similar performance in terms of the union rate and shoulder function, better operative parameters and fewer complications.

Dataset Information

Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation for the Treatment Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation for the Treatment Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets