Efficacy of elastic intramedullary nail versus locking plate fixation in the treatment of middle clavicle fracture

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.0161

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: For the treatment of middle clavicle fractures, elastic intramedullary nailing has gradually gained everyone's approval because of its small incision and short operation time. Locking plate fixation is currently the main surgical treatment. At present, there are a few comparative studies on the results of the two surgical treatments, but the results are still controversial. In particular, there is a lack of comparative studies on long-term efficacy and complications.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical results and complications of locking plate and elastic intramedullary nailing for middle clavicular fracture.

METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 85 patients with middle clavicular fractures who were hospitalized at the Army General Hospital of Second Medical College of Southern Medical University from June 2014 to June 2015 undergoing surgeries was performed. They were divided into two groups randomly: locking plate group (n=62) and elastic intramedullary nailing group (n=23). The incision length, operation time, blood loss and time of hospital staying were compared between the two groups. Regular follow-up, radiography assessment and postoperative complications and shoulder function score were measured.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) Incision length, operation time, blood loss and time of hospital staying were significantly better in the elastic intramedullary nailing group than in the locking plate group (P < 0.05). (2) The complications of the elastic intramedullary nailing group were significantly lower than that of the locking plate group (P < 0.05). The main complications of locking plate group were superficial wound infection, hypesthesia in the local incision and implant protuberance. Only two patients in the intramedullary nailing group experienced complications. (3) The healing rate of elastic intramedullary nailing group was higher than that of the locking plate group, which was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). (4) The DASH scores and the Constant-Murley scores of the two groups after operation were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). (5) The elastic intramedullary nailing and locking plate are both effective methods for the treatment of middle clavicular fracture. Incision length, operation time, blood loss and average length of hospital stay have obvious advantages; the incidence of complications is low; and recovery is fast in the elastic intramedullary nailing group. However, elastic nail may stimulate the local skin, causing some impact for the patients’ daily life.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程

Key words: Clavicle, Fractures, Bone, Internal Fixators, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Peng Lin-bo, Chen Xiao-bin, Zhang Jian-zheng, Wang Xiao-wei, Sun Tian-sheng. Efficacy of elastic intramedullary nail versus locking plate fixation in the treatment of middle clavicle fracture [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2018, 22(11): 1671-1676.

Figures/Tables 3

References

[1] Postacchini F, Gumina S, De Santis P, et al. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002; 11:452-456.

[2] Nordqvist A, Petersson C. The incidence of fractures of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994:127-132.

[3] Govindasamy R, Kasirajan S, Meleppuram JJ, et al. A retrospective study of titanium elastic stable intramedullary nailing in displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures. Rev Bras Ortop. 2016 ;52(3):270-277.

[4] Gummesson C, Ward MM, Atroshi I. The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH): validity and reliability based on responses within the full-length DASH. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:44.

[5] van der Meijden OA, Houwert RM, Hulsmans M, et al. Operative treatment of dislocated midshaft clavicular fractures: plate or intramedullary nail fixation? A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg. 2015; 97:613-619.

[6] Angst F, Schwyzer HK, Aeschlimann A, et al. Measures of adult shoulder function: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Arthritis Care Res. 2011; 63 Suppl 11:S174-188.

[7] Ebrahimzadeh MH, Moradi A, Vahedi E, et al. Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of Shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (Quick-DASH). Int J Prev Med. 2015;6:59.

[8] Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, et al. A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008; 17:355-361.

[9] Yao M, Yang L, Cao ZY, et al. Chinese version of the Constant-Murley questionnaire for shoulder pain and disability: a reliability and validation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017; 15:178.

[10] Chachan S, Tudu B, Sahu B. Ultrasound monitoring of fracture healing: is this the end of radiography in fracture follow-ups? J Orthop Trauma. 2015; 29:e133-138.

[11] Litrenta J, Tornetta P 3rd, Mehta S, et al. Determination of radiographic healing: an assessment of consistency using RUST and modified RUST in metadiaphyseal fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2015; 29:516-520.

[12] Hill JM, McGuire MH, Crosby LA. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg. 1997;79:537-539.

[13] Khan LA, Bradnock TJ, Scott C, et al. Fractures of the clavicle. J Bone Joint Surg. 2009;91:447-460.

[14] Roy JS, MacDermid JC, Woodhouse LJ. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Constant-Murley score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010; 19:157-164.

[15] Ledger M, Leeks N, Ackland T, et al. Short malunions of the clavicle: an anatomic and functional study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14:349-354.

[16] Golish SR, Oliviero JA, Francke EI, et al. A biomechanical study of plate versus intramedullary devices for midshaft clavicle fixation. J Orthop Surg Res. 2008; 3:28.

[17] Onstenk R, Malessy MJ, Nelissen RG. Brachial plexus injury due to unhealed or wrongly healed clavicular fracture. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2001;145(50):2440-2443.

[18] Bernstein J. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007; 89:1866; author reply 1866-1867.

[19] Bostman O, Manninen M, Pihlajamaki H. Complications of plate fixation in fresh displaced midclavicular fractures. J Trauma.1997; 43:778-783.

[20] Chen YF, Wei HF, Zhang C, et al. Retrospective comparison of titanium elastic nail (TEN) and reconstruction plate repair of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21:495-501.

[21] Poigenfurst J, Rappold G, Fischer W. Plating of fresh clavicular fractures: results of 122 operations. Injury. 1992; 23:237-241.

[22] Giddie J, Fisher R, White A. A rare anatomical variant: transosseous supraclavicular nerve identified during clavicle fracture fixation. J Surg Case Rep. 2017;2017(11):rjx230.

[23] Strauss EJ, Egol KA, France MA, et al. Complications of intramedullary Hagie pin fixation for acute midshaft clavicle fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007; 16:280-284.

[24] Eickhoff A, Fischer M, Gebhard F, et al. Complications after intramedullary stabilization of clavicle fractures. Der Unfallchirurg. 2018.

[25] Liu HH, Chang CH, Chia WT, et al. Comparison of plates versus intramedullary nails for fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. J Trauma. 2010; 69:E82-87.

[26] Jorgensen A, Troelsen A, Ban I. Predictors associated with nonunion and symptomatic malunion following non-operative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures--a systematic review of the literature. Int Orthop. 2014; 38: 2543-2549.

[27] van der V, Timmers TK, Broeders I, et al. Displaced clavicle fractures in cyclists: return to athletic activity after anteroinferior plate fixation. Clin J Sport Med. 2017.

[28] Andrade-Silva FB, Kojima KE, Joeris A, et al. Single, superiorly placed reconstruction plate compared with flexible intramedullary nailing for midshaft clavicular fractures: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg. 2015; 97:620-626.

[29] Duan X, Zhong G, Cen S, et al. Plating versus intramedullary pin or conservative treatment for midshaft fracture of clavicle: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011; 20:1008-1015.

[30] Houwert RM, Wijdicks FJ, Steins Bisschop C, et al. Plate fixation versus intramedullary fixation for displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures: a systematic review. Int Orthop. 2012; 36: 579-585.

[31] 张峻玮,聂伟志,陈玲玲,等. 髓内钉与接骨板治疗锁骨中段骨折的前瞻性随机对照研究[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2016,18(7): 558-563.