Does plate position influence the outcome in midshaft clavicular fractures? A multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: To date, it remains unclear whether superior or anterior plating is the best option for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with regard to the incidence of implant removal due to implant irritation, risk of complications, time to union, and function. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all midshaft clavicular fractures treated operatively between 2017 and 2020 in two hospitals in Switzerland were analyzed. The participating hospitals differed with regard to their standard practice; one offered superior plating only, while the other predominantly employed an anterior plate. The primary outcome was the incidence of implant removal for irritation. Secondary outcomes were time to union, complications, re-interventions, and range of motion during the follow-up period of at least 6 months. RESULTS: In total, 168 patients were included in the study of which 81 (48%) received anterior plating and 87 (52%) superior plating. The overall mean age was 45 years (SD 16). There was no significant difference between anterior and superior plating with regard to implant removal (58.5% versus 57.1%, p = 0.887), infection (5.7% versus 1.8%, p = 0.071), and time to union (median 48 weeks versus 52 weeks, p = 0.643). Data on range of motion were available in 71 patients. There was no significant difference in anteflexion (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) and abduction (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective cohort study did not find sufficient evidence to recommend one implant position over the other for midshaft clavicular fractures with regard to removal due to irritation. Time to union was similar and Infections were equally rare in both groups. Notably, a considerable number of patients in both groups had their implants removed due to irritation. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine how much plate position contributes to the occurrence of irritation and whether other patient or implant-related factors might play a role. Until this is clarified, implant position should be based on surgeons preference and experience.

A natural experiment study: Low-profile double plating versus single plating techniques in midshaft clavicle fractures-Study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Single plate osteosynthesis is commonly employed when performing surgical stabilization of midshaft clavicle fractures. In recent years, a smaller structural low-profile double plating technique has been described as a possible solution for the high removal rates associated with single plating. A previous meta-analysis has demonstrated that low-profile double plating attains the same healing rates as single plating without a higher chance of fracture-related infections. This meta-analysis, however, was based on relatively small studies. Therefore, a multicentre prospective natural experiment was designed using natural variation in treatment regimens and geographical location of the trauma as treatment allocation mechanism to compare both treatments on a larger scale. This manuscript describes its protocol. MATERIAL & METHODS: Patients (≥16 years) with primary midshaft clavicle fractures that are eligible for operative treatment will be included. Treatment allocation will be determined by the geographical location of the accident and local hospital providing treatment. In two centres, single plating is the treatment of choice for these patients. In two others, low-profile double plating has become the standard treatment. For the low-profile double plating group, one superiorly positioned VariAx 2.0mm and one anterior VariAx 2.4mm or 2.7mm plate will be used. For the single plating group, the standard locally available implant will be used. A total of 336 patients will be included. The primary outcome of interest is re-intervention. Secondary outcomes include complications, operative time, length of incision, functional scores (DASH, EQ-5D-DL, VAS-Pain/Satisfaction) and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This study will determine whether low-profile double plating has significant clinical and cost-effective benefits over single plating techniques in midshaft clavicle fractures. The study will also give insight in the performance of a natural experiment study design for orthopedic trauma research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered on ClincialTrials.gov, identifier NCT05579873.