METHODS: From January 2013 till March 2018, a total of 55 patients with acute unilateral closed midshaft clavicle fracture were treated with either a 3.5-mm pre-contoured LCP [32 patients; 25 men and 7 women; mean age: 35 years (range: 19-63 years)] or a 3.5-mm nonlocked reconstruction plate [23 patients; 20 men and 3 women; mean age: 31.4 years (range: 17-61 years)]. The clinical outcomes in terms of fracture union, Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, implant irritation, failure rate, and reoperation rate were evaluated retrospectively. The patient billing records were reviewed to obtain primary operation, reoperation, and total operative cost for midshaft clavicle fracture. These values were analyzed and converted from Malaysia Ringgit (RM) to United States Dollar (USD) at the exchange rate of RM 1 to USD 0.24. All patients were followed up for at least one-year duration.
RESULTS: The mean time to fracture union, implant irritation, implant failure, and reoperation rate showed no significant difference between the two groups of patients. The mean Quick DASH score was significantly better in the reconstruction plate group with 13 points compared with 28 points in the LCP group (p=0.003). In terms of total operative cost, the LCP group recorded a cost of USD 391 higher than the reconstruction plate group (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The 3.5-mm reconstruction plate achieved not only satisfactory clinical outcomes but was also more cost-effective than the LCP in the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic study.
METHOD: Twenty pieces of fourth-generation, biomechanical testing grade, left third metacarpal composite bones were used. Resin was used to create the holding block at both ends of the bone. An oscillating saw with 0.8 mm thick saw blade was used to osteotomize the metacarpal sawbones to create a midshaft transverse metacarpal fracture model. Ten pieces were fixed with a 2.0 mm titanium locking plate via unicortical screw purchase and 10 were fixed with a 2.0 mm, four holes, titanium dynamic compression plate, bicortical purchase of screws. They were subjected to cyclic load to failure testing three-point bending and torsion.
RESULTS: There were no significant difference in stiffness and cyclic three-point bending to failure between the unicortical locking plate group and the bicortical compression plate group. The bicortical compression plate group is stiffer and has a higher cyclic bending load to failure as compared to the unicortical locking plate group.
CONCLUSION: Unicortical locking plate fixation of metacarpal fracture can be reliably applied clinically to produce a strong and stable construct that allows early mobilization of the joints. This will not only reduce the complication rate of metacarpal plating, but also improve the functional outcome of the hand.
METHODS: We report a case series of 16 patients who successfully underwent fixation of the clavicle under the wide-awake technique. The clavicle fractures were grouped under the AO Fracture Classification. The WALANT solution comprised 1% lidocaine, 1:100,000 epinephrine, and 10:1 sodium bicarbonate. A total of 40 mL was injected in each patient with 10 mL subcutaneously along the clavicle followed by 30 mL subperiosteally at multiple intervals and directions.
RESULTS: The Numerical Pain Rating Score was 0 during WALANT injection and during surgery except for 2 patients with Numerical Pain Rating Scores of 1 and 2, respectively, during reduction.
CONCLUSION: We conclude that clavicle plating under WALANT is a good alternative option of anesthesia.
METHODS: Group I (N=12) underwent ORIF. Group II (N=15) underwent APSF. Anthropometric data, pre and post-operative stay, complications and duration off work were recorded in this retrospective case cohort study. Radiographs were analyzed for Bohler's, Gissane's angle and Sanders' classification. AOFAS Hindfoot and SF 36 scores were collected at final follow-up.
RESULTS: Anthropometric data, Bohler's and Gissane's angles, AOFAS and SF 36 scores were not significantly different. Pre-operative duration was 12.3 days in ORIF and 6.9 days in APSF. Post-operative duration was 7.3 days vs 3.8 days. Duration off work was 6.2 months vs 2.9 months.
CONCLUSION: The APSF group was able to have surgery earlier, go home faster, and return to work earlier. This study was not powered to demonstrate a difference in wound complication rates.