Midshaft clavicle fractures: is anterior plating an acceptable alternative to superior plating?

• Published in: European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology 2023-12, Vol.33 (8), p.3373-3377
• Main Authors: Mullis, Brian H., Jeray, Kyle J., Broderick, Scott, Tanner, Stephanie L., Snider, Becky G., Everhart, Joshua
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Bone Plates; Clavicle - diagnostic imaging; Clavicle - injuries; Clavicle - surgery; Enrollments; Fracture Fixation, Internal - adverse effects; Fracture Fixation, Internal - methods; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Bone - diagnostic imaging; Fractures, Bone - etiology; Fractures, Bone - surgery; Gender; Humans; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Original Article; Orthopedics; Patient satisfaction; Prospective Studies; Shoulder Fractures; Surgeons; Surgery; Surgical Orthopedics; Trauma; Trauma centers; Traumatic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1432-1068; 1633-8065; 1432-1068
• DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03563-5

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether anterior plating is better tolerated than superior plating for midshaft clavicle fractures. Methods This was a prospective non-randomized observational cohort study following operative vs. non-operative management of clavicle fractures from 2003 to 2018 at 7 level 1 academic trauma centers in the USA. The subset of patients treated with plate and screws is the basis for this comparative study. Adults aged 18–85 with closed clavicle fractures displaced over 100% or shortened by more than 1.5 cm were eligible for enrollment. Patients were followed for 2 years following enrollment. Allowable fixation methods at the discretion of the surgeon consisted of anterior–inferior or superior plating. A total of 412 patients were enrolled. Of these, 192 patients received either superior or anterior plating for a displaced clavicle fracture with complete documented prospective research forms capturing type of plating technique. The primary outcome measure was hardware removal (HWR). Secondary outcomes were Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and Visual Analog Pain (VAP) score, and satisfaction score (1 = high satisfaction; 5 = low satisfaction). Results There was no difference in HWR rates (7.1% superior 9/127; 6.2% anterior 4/65, p  = 0.81), VAP score (mean 1.5 SD 1.0 superior; mean 1.7 SD 0.6 anterior, p  = 0.21), DASH score (mean 7.5 SD 12.4 superior; mean 5.2 SD 15.2 anterior; p  = 0.18) or satisfaction score (mean 1.6 SD 1.0 superior; mean 1.7 SD 0.60 anterior, p  = 0.18). Conclusion There is no difference in HWR rates or functional outcomes when using a superior vs. anterior plating technique.