The Comparison of Results of Treatment of Midshaft Clavicle Fracture between Operative Treatment with Plate and Non-Operative Treatment | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 17، دوره 2، شماره 3، آذر 2014، صفحه 210-214 اصل مقاله (343.45 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2014.3351 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohsen Khorami* 1؛ Hamid Reza Arti2؛ Mohammad Fakour3؛ Hossein Mokarrami3؛ Abdolhossein Mahdi Nasab3؛ Farid Shahrivar3 | ||
| 1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Golestan Hospital, Jonishapur University of MedicalSciences, Ahvaz, Iran. | ||
| 2Golestan Hospital, Joundishapour University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| 3Imam Khomeini Hospital, Joundishapour University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: Clavicle fractures are common and usually heal without complications. In this study, we evaluated the outcomes of non-operative versus operative management of displaced fractures. Methods: In a prospective clinical trial study, sixty-five patients with displaced clavicle mid-shaft fractures were nonrandomly divided in two treatment groups. The first group underwent non-operative treatment with figure of 8 bandage (30 patients), and the other underwent operative treatment with plate fixation (35 patients). Figure of 8 bandage and 3.5 millimeter DCP plate with at least six cortical screws were used in non-operative and operative groups respectively. We followed up all patients at weeks 2, 6 and 12, and at month sixth. In addition to clinical examination and x-ray evaluation, we assessed satisfaction, DASH and Constant Shoulder Score for each individual. Results: The average durations of union were 19.3 and 24.4 weeks in operative and non-operative groups respectively (P=0.006). Satisfaction with operative treatment was 74.3% and with non-operative treatment was 66.7%, showing no significant difference (P=0.500). The non-union rate was 5.7% in the operative group and 13.3% in the non-operative group (P=0.518). A significant difference between the two groups in terms of DASH and Constant Shoulder Scores after the six-month follow-up was not found (P=0.352). Conclusions: According to our results, we recommend operative treatment in mid-shaft clavicle fractures only when there is a definitive indication. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Clavicle؛ Constant Shoulder Score؛ DASH score؛ Internal Fixation؛ Non-operative management | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Neer CS II. Fractures of the distal third of the clavicle. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;58:43-50.
Van der Meijden OA, Gaskill TR, Millett PJ. Treatment of clavicle fractures: current concepts review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(3):423-9.
Stanley D, Trowbridge EA, Norris SH. The mechanism of clavicular fracture. A clinical and biomechanical analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988;70(3):461-4.
Browner BD, Jupiter JB. Skeletal Trauma. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2003.
Graves ML, Geissler WB, Freeland AE. Midshaft clavicular fractures: the role of operative treatment. Orthopedics. 2005;28(8):761-4.
Hill JM, McGuire MH, Crosby LA. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(4):537-9.
Tabatabaei S, Shalamzari S. Treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: A comparison between smooth pin and LCDCP and reconstruction plate fixation. Pak J Med Sci. 2011; 27(5):1129-34.
Altamimi SA, McKee MD, Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Nonoperative Treatment Compared With Plate Fixation of Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90:1-8.
Zlowodzki M, Zelle BA, Cole PA, Jeray K, McKee MD, Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. Treatment of acute midshaft clavicle fractures: systematic review of 214 fractures: on behalf of the Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. J Orthop Trauma. 2005;19:504-7.
Virtanen KJ, Remes V, Pajarinen J, Savolainen V, Björkenheim JM, Paavola M. Sling Compared With Plate Osteosynthesis For Treatment of Displaced Midshaft Clavicular Fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(17):1546-53.
Ban I, Branner U, Holck K, Krasheninnikoff M, Troelsen A. Clavicle fractures may be conservatively treated with acceptable results-asystematic review.Danish Med J. 2012; 59:1-7.
Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, Wakefield AE. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1359-65.
Brinker MR, Edwards TB, O’Connor DP. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicular fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(3):676-7.
Dhoju D, Shrestha D, Parajuli NP, Shrestha R, Sharma V. Operative fixation of displaced middle third clavicle (Edinburg Type 2) fracture with superior reconstruction plate osteosynthesis. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2011;9(36):286-90.
Bajuri MY, Maidin S, Rauf A, Baharuddin M, Harjeet S. Functional Outcomes of Conservatively treated Clavicle fractures. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011; 66(4): 635-9.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 2,288 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 2,081 |
||