Dual Mini-Fragment Plating Is Comparable With Precontoured Small Fragment Plating for Operative Diaphyseal Clavicle Fractures: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Forearm Fracture Fixation with Locking Plates: Does Size Matter?

Purpose

Forearm shaft fractures of the radius and/or ulna are typically repaired with plates and screws, with 3.5 mm nonlocking screws being generally recommended. However, smaller plates and screws, either nonlocking or locking, can also be applied. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review whether fracture healing rates and related complications are affected by plate size and type.

Methods

Patient demographic and descriptive data were retrospectively collected for all patients with a forearm shaft fracture treated with repair of the radial shaft and/or ulna shaft between 2017 and 2021 at a multiprovider and multilocation single institution. Inclusion criteria involved use of a locking plate with a minimum radiographic follow-up of 60 days and/or until fracture union was confirmed.

Results

A total of 110 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 45 (40.9%) females and 65 (59.1%) males included with the mean age at time of injury being 47 years (± 22). There were 34 (30.1%) isolated radius fractures, 50 (45.5%) isolated ulna fractures, and 26 (23.6%) both bone forearm fractures. Screw sizes consisted of 3.5 mm (small fragment) screws in 57 (52%) cases, whereas 2.7 mm/2.5 mm/2.4 mm (mini fragment) screws were used in 53 (48%) cases. Fracture union was confirmed in 108 (98%) cases. Among the two nonunion cases, one case (50%) involved a small fragment, and one case (50%) involved a mini fragment plate.

Conclusions

This study confirms that fracture union is high following any size plate fixation of radius and/or ulna fractures. Moreover, smaller screw sizes did not affect fracture union rates. Choice of plate type and screw diameter should be based on patient characteristics and surgeon preference and need not be limited to only 3.5 mm plate and screws.

Type of Study/Level of Evidence

Prognosis IIb.

Functional outcomes and complications of plate fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures by type and location: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Various plate types are used in the surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. These plates can be positioned in different locations on the clavicle, although no studies to date have elucidated optimal plate type and location of fixation. This systematic review compares the functional outcomes and complications in the management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using plate fixation by stratifying by both plate type and location.

Methods

A systematic review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted to identify all papers reporting functional outcomes, union rates, and/or complications using plates for the management of midshaft clavicle fractures. Multiple databases and trial registries were searched from inception until March 2022. A meta-analysis was conducted for functional outcomes and type of complication, stratified by plate type (locking, compression, or reconstruction) and location (superior or anteroinferior). Pooled estimates of functional outcome scores and incidence of complications were calculated using a random effects model. Risk of bias and quality were assessed using the risk of bias version 2 and ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) tools. The confidence in estimates were rated and described according to the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) working group.

Results

Forty-five studies were included in the systematic review and 43 were included in the meta-analysis. Depending on plate type and location, pooled Constant-Murley Scores ranged from 89.23 to 93.48 at 12 months. Nonunion rates were 3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1-6) for superior locking plates (GRADE Low). Rates of any complication (nonunion, hardware failure, hardware irritation, wound dehiscence, keloid, superficial infection, deep infection, delayed union, malunion, and/or persistent pain) by plate type and location ranged from 3% to 17% (GRADE Very Low to Moderate). Superior compression plates had the highest incidence of any complications (17% [95% CI 5-44], GRADE Very Low), while anterior inferior compression plates had the lowest incidence of any complication (3% [95% CI 0-15], GRADE Very Low). Hardware irritation was the most reported individual complication for superior locking plates and superior compression plates, 11% (95% CI 7-17, GRADE Low) and 11% (95% CI 3-33, GRADE Very Low), respectively.

Conclusion

Although most studies were of low quality, studies reporting functional outcomes generally showed good functional results and similar incidence of any complication regardless of plate type and location. There is no evidence of a plate and location combination to optimize patient functional outcomes or complications. We were unable to reliably evaluate union rates or individual complications for most plate types stratified by location.

Dual Versus Single Plate Fixation of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have highlighted lower rates of reoperation if fixation of a displaced midshaft clavicle fracture is performed with dual plating (DP) compared with single plating (SP). Despite higher initial costs associated with the DP construct, the observed reduction in secondary surgeries compared with the SP construct may make it a more cost-effective treatment option. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of DP compared with SP in patients with operatively indicated displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

METHODS

We developed a decision tree to model the occurrence of postoperative complications (acute hardware complications, wound healing issues, deep infection, nonunion, and symptomatic hardware) associated with secondary surgeries. Complication-specific risk estimates were pooled for both plating techniques using the available literature. The time horizon was 2 years, and the analysis was conducted from the health-care payer's perspective. The costs were estimated using direct medical costs, and the benefits were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We assumed that DP would be $300 more expensive than SP initially. We conducted probabilistic and 1-way sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The model predicted reoperation in 6% of patients in the DP arm compared with 14% of patients in the SP arm. In the base case analysis, DP increased QALYs by 0.005 and costs by $71 per patient, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $13,242 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the cost-effectiveness of DP was driven by the cost of the index surgery, risk of symptomatic hardware, and nonunion complications with SP and DP. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained, 95% of simulations suggested that DP was cost-effective compared with SP.

CONCLUSIONS

When indicated, operative management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures using DP was found to be cost-effective compared with SP. Despite its higher initial hardware costs, DP fixation appears to offset its added costs with greater health utility via lower rates of reoperation and improved patient quality of life.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic and Decision Analysis Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dual Mini-Fragment Plate Fixation of Midshaft Clavicle Fractures Reduces Risk of Reoperation Compared With Single-Plate Fixation Techniques

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have highlighted dual plating as a method of reducing high rates of postoperative complication after operative management of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. However, few studies have reliably characterized reoperation rates and magnitude of risk reduction achieved when using dual versus anterior and superior single-plate techniques.

HYPOTHESIS

There would be lower rates of reoperation among patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures via dual plating.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent ORIF for a displaced midshaft clavicular fracture between 2010 and 2021 at a level 1 trauma center with a minimum 12-month follow-up. Patients were separated into 3 cohorts based on fixation type: (1) orthogonal dual mini-fragment plate fixation, (2) superior plate fixation, and (3) anterior plate fixation. Data on patient characteristics, fracture pattern, and reoperations were documented. All-cause reoperation rates and hazard ratio (HR) estimates of dual, superior, and anterior plating were calculated using a multivariate multilevel mixed-effects parametric survival model. Significant confounders including high-risk fracture morphology and smoking status were controlled for in the final model.

RESULTS

A final cohort of 256 patients was identified with mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 3.8 years. In total, 101 patients underwent superior plating, 92 underwent anterior plating, and 63 underwent dual plating. Overall, 31 reoperations took place (18 in superior, 12 in anterior, 1 in dual plating) among 22 patients. Major contributors to reoperation included symptomatic hardware (n = 11), nonunion (n = 8), deep infection (n = 7), and wound dehiscence (n = 2). Superior plating revealed the highest reoperation rate of 0.031 per person-years, followed by anterior plating with 0.026 per person-years and dual plating with 0.005 per person-years. Overall, single plating (either anterior or superior placement) had a nearly 8-fold greater risk of reoperation than dual plating (HR, 7.62; 95% CI, 1.02-56.82; P = .048). Further broken down by technique, superior plating had an 8-fold greater risk of reoperation than dual plating (HR, 8.36; 95% CI, 1.10-63.86; P = .041), but anterior plating did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference compared with dual plating (HR, 6.79; 95% CI, 0.87-52.90; P = .068).

CONCLUSION

Dual-plate fixation represents an excellent treatment for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures, with low rates of nonunion and reoperation. When compared with single locked superior or anterior plate fixation, dual mini-fragment plate fixation has a nearly 8-fold lower risk of reoperation.

Dual- Versus Single-Plate Fixation of Clavicle Fractures: Understanding the Rationale Behind both Approaches

Clavicle fractures are a common injury resulting from a high-energy force, such as a fall onto the shoulder, motor vehicle accident, or sporting activity. Although some clavicle fractures may be treated nonoperatively, operative treatment results in higher union rates and faster return to activity. Here we discuss the operative treatment options for plating of clavicle fractures; specifically, a single plate placed either superiorly or anteriorly or two plates placed orthogonally. Because both techniques provide adequate stability, fracture and patient characteristics should guide the surgical decision making regarding single versus dual plating of clavicle fractures.

Clavicle Nonunion and Malunion: Surgical Interventions for Functional Improvement

Clavicle nonunion and malunion are relatively uncommon but, when symptomatic, can result in pain and dysfunction that requires surgical intervention. Various reconstructive and grafting techniques are available to achieve stable fixation and union. In the setting of persistent nonunion, vascularized bone grafting may be necessary. A thorough understanding of the patient's type of nonunion and potential for healing is crucial for achieving satisfactory results because is thoughtful preoperative planning and surgical fixation.

Are two plates better than one? A systematic review of dual plating for acute midshaft clavicle fractures

BACKGROUND

The rate of operative fixation of acute midshaft clavicle fractures has exponentially increased in recent years; however, the rate of reoperation for symptomatic hardware removal remains high and the optimal fixation strategy unknown. This systematic review aimed to summarize available evidence for dual plating of acute displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed searches identified clinical studies evaluating dual plate fixation of acute midshaft clavicle fractures. Pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model in RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Eleven studies including 672 patients were included. Hardware removal occurred in 4.4% and 12.3% of patients undergoing dual and single plate fixation, respectively. Compared to single plating, dual plating had significantly lower odds of hardware removal (P = 0.001) with no difference in union rates. There were no significant differences in reoperation (excluding hardware removal), complications, and patient-reported outcomes between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that dual plating of acute displaced midshaft clavicle fractures may lead to lower rates of reoperation for symptomatic hardware removal without compromising fracture healing. Ultimately, well-designed randomized trials are needed to further investigate the findings from this systematic review.

Operative Versus Nonoperative Management of Displaced Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

To date, the optimal management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures remains unknown. Operatively, plate or nail fixation may be used. Nonoperatively, the options are sling or harness. Given the equivocal effectiveness between approaches, the costs to the health care system and the patient become critical considerations. A decision tree model was constructed to study plate and sling management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. Primary analysis used 6 randomized controlled trials that directly compared open reduction and internal fixation with a plate to sling. Secondary analysis included 18 studies that studied either plate, sling, or both. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Second-order Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was subsequently conducted. In primary analysis, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000, operative management was found to be less cost-effective relative to nonoperative management, with an ICER of $606,957/QALY (0.03 additional QALYs gained for an additional $16,120). In PSA, sling management was cost-effective across all WTP ranges. In secondary analysis, the ICER decreased to $75,230/QALY. Primary analysis shows that plate management is not a cost-effective option. In secondary analysis, the incremental effectiveness of plate management increased enough that the calculated ICER is below the WTP threshold of $100,000; however, the strength of evidence in secondary analysis is lower than in primary analysis. Thus, because neither option is dominant in this model, both plate and sling remain viable approaches, although the cost-conscious decision will be to treat these fractures with a sling until future data suggest otherwise. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(5):e243-e251.].

Dual Plate Minifragment Fixation of Clavicle Fractures- Technique and Approach

SUMMARY

The treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures continues to evolve, with a variety of fixation techniques and constructs used. Symptomatic hardware is a common complication related to plate fixation of the clavicle, and often results in secondary surgery for implant removal. The minifragment dual plate fixation technique for clavicle fractures provides a construct that may result in fewer implant related complications with comparable fixation stability to precontoured locking plates. Our case presentation demonstrates our approach to midshaft clavicle fractures, the benefits of this surgical technique, and reported outcomes from this fixation method.

Dual mini-fragment plate fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures is biomechanically equivalent to anatomic pre-contoured plating

OBJECTIVES

To biomechanically compare the stiffness of midshaft synthetic clavicle osteotomies fixed with either superior anatomic pre-contoured locking plates, anterior anatomic pre-contoured locking plates, or short-segment dual orthogonal mini-plate fixation.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Controlled laboratory study. Specimens Twenty-one synthetic pre-osteotomized clavicles were separated into three groups: superior plating, anterior plating, or dual-plating. Each clavicle was sequentially tested in non-destructive cycles of axial compression, three-point bending, and torsion. Load and displacement were recorded. Stiffness was calculated.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found between construct stiffness during axial compression, three-point bending, or torsional testing. One superior plated clavicle suffered catastrophic failure during axial compression. One dual mini-fragment plated clavicle suffered catastrophic failure during torsion.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthogonal dual mini-fragment fixation of transverse clavicle fractures is biomechanically similar to superior and anterior pre-contoured anatomic locking plate fixation. No statistically significant differences in construct stiffness were found in axial compression, three-point bending, or torsion testing. Further clinical research is required to determine the long-term stability of dual mini-fragment plate fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Low profile dual plating for mid-shaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of observational studies

INTRODUCTION

Low profile dual plate fixation using two mini fragment plates (< 2.7 mm thickness) is a relatively new technique and alternative to single plating for treating midshaft clavicle fractures. To date, no meta-analysis has been performed comparing these two techniques. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials was performed comparing single plating to low profile dual plating for midshaft clavicle fractures.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing both treatments. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. The primary outcome is overall complication rate and re-intervention rate. Secondary outcomes include healing, operation duration and functional scores.

RESULTS

Low profile dual plating has favourable outcomes regarding overall complication rate (8.1% vs. 22.5%, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.7, I² = 16%, p = 0.007) and re-intervention rate (6.1% vs. 16.1%, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.9, I² = 25%, p = 0.02). The largest contributing factor behind these differences was the high incidence of implant related complaints in the single plating group (4.7% vs. 11.6%, OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.9, I² = 0%, p = 0.02). The use of low profile dual plating does not have a detrimental effect on healing with union being attained in 99% compared to 97.4% in the single plating group (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.3-10.7, I = 0%, p = 0.5). Data on operating time and functional results is limited.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that dual plating low profile plates for midshaft clavicle fractures is a safe procedure attaining the same union rates seen in patients treated with single plating. In addition, it seems to have a lower overall complication and re-intervention rate, mostly driven by the lower incidence of implant related complaints. Low profile dual plating, however, is a fairly new technique and should be further explored in respect to more differentiated endpoints to test whether these first findings are valid.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Mini-fragment plating of olecranon fractures is comparable to precontoured small-fragment plating

INTRODUCTION

Though long-term functional outcomes of olecranon fracture plate fixation are favorable, postoperative implant irritation commonly leads to elective removal. We hypothesized that mini-fragment plates will decrease implant removal compared to precontoured plates.

METHODS

Patients with isolated olecranon fracture (AO/OTA 2U1-B1) treated with plate fixation were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into groups based on whether they underwent open reduction and internal fixation with a (1) surgeon contoured mini-fragment or (2) precontoured olecranon-specific plate. Rates of symptomatic implants and implant removal were compared.

RESULTS

98 and 32 patients were treated with precontoured and mini-fragment plates, respectively. Baseline demographics and comorbidities were similar. Mean follow-up was 20.6 months. There were no differences in rates of postoperative complication (22/98, 22.4% vs. 5/32, 15.6%; p = 0.41) or reoperation (37/98, 37.8% vs. 8/32, 25%; p = 0.19). Symptomatic implants were common in the precontoured cohort (44/98, 44.9% vs. 7/32, 21.9%; p < 0.05). Implant removal rates were 36.7% and 18.8%, respectively (p = 0.06).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Olecranon fracture stabilization with mini-fragment plate is associated with lower rates of symptomatic implants, with no difference in postoperative complications or reoperations. Mini-fragment plating is a safe and promising alternative to precontoured plating.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Different Plate Configurations for Midshaft Clavicle Fracture Fixation: Single Plating Compared with Dual Mini-Fragment Plating

Background:

Dual-plate constructs have become an increasingly common fixation technique for midshaft clavicle fractures and typically involve the use of mini-fragment plates. The goal of this technique is to reduce plate prominence and implant irritation. However, limited biomechanical data exist for these lower-profile constructs. The study aim was to compare dual mini-fragment orthogonal plating with small-fragment clavicle plates for biomechanical noninferiority and to determine if an optimal plate configuration could be identified using a cadaveric model.

Methods:

Twenty-four cadaveric clavicles were randomized to 1 of 6 groups, stratified by computed tomography-based bone mineral content (BMC): precontoured superior or anterior fixation using a single 3.5-mm Locking Compression Plate (LCP), and 4 different dual-plating constructs utilizing 2.4-mm and 2.7-mm Adaptation plates or LCPs. An inferior butterfly fracture was created. Axial, torsional, and bending (anterior and superior surface loading) stiffnesses were determined through nondestructive cyclic testing, followed by a load-to-failure test in 3-point superior surface bending.

Results:

For axial stiffness, the 2 dual-plate constructs with a superior 2.4-mm and anterior 2.7-mm plate (either Adaptation or LCP) were significantly stiffer than the other 4 constructs (p = 0.021 and p = 0.034). For both superior and anterior bending, the superior 2.4-mm and anterior 2.7-mm plate constructs were significantly stiffer when compared with the 3.5-mm superior plate (p = 0.043). No significant differences were found in torsional stiffness or load to failure between the different constructs.

Conclusions:

Dual plating using mini-fragment plates is biomechanically superior for the fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures when compared with a single, superior, 3.5-mm plate and has biomechanical properties similar to those of a 3.5-mm plate placed anteriorly. With the exception of axial stiffness, no significant differences were found when different dual-plating constructs were compared with each other.

Clinical Relevance:

This study validates the use of dual plating for midshaft clavicle fractures.

Outcomes and complications after dual plate vs. single plate fixation of displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Open 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.

METHODS

Using 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.

RESULTS

Our 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.

CONCLUSION

Results 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 EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III.

Risk factors for hardware removal following operative treatment of middle- and distal-third clavicular fractures

BACKGROUND

The incidence of hardware removal (HWR) after operative fixation of clavicular fractures varies widely. Risk factors related to HWR remain incompletely understood. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of and risk factors for HWR after plate fixation of middle- and distal-third clavicular fractures. We hypothesized that (1) the total HWR incidence would be <20%, (2) the HWR incidence of operatively treated distal- and middle-third clavicular fractures would not be statistically different, and (3) symptomatic implants would be the most common HWR indication.

METHODS

We performed a multi-hospital retrospective study of skeletally mature patients who underwent plate fixation of middle- and distal-third clavicular fractures from November 2008 to November 2018. Data included patient demographic characteristics, mechanism of injury, operative records, hardware-related symptoms, subsequent HWR, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients (aged 16-75 years, 76.7% male patients) were included. Of the patients, 87 (84.5%) underwent plate fixation for midshaft clavicular fractures and 16 (15.5%) underwent plate fixation for distal-third clavicular fractures. HWR was performed in 13 patients (12.6%). A significantly higher percentage of HWR procedures were performed for distal clavicular fractures (50%) than for middle-third clavicular fractures (4.9%, P < .0001). An initial high-energy mechanism of injury was associated with HWR (P = .0025). The most common indication for HWR was symptomatic hardware (69.2%). The overall complication rate was 14.5%.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of clavicular HWR was 12.6%. A distal fracture location was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HWR. An initial high-energy mechanism of injury was a significant risk factor for HWR. The primary indication for HWR was symptomatic hardware.