Analysis of Fracture Midshaft Clavicle Treated by Intramedullary Device Versus Conservative

Swapnil Date (1) , Kiran Saoji (2) , Kushal Surana (3)
(1) J N Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha-442001, Maharashtra, India, India ,
(2) J N Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha-442001, Maharashtra, India, India ,
(3) J N Medical College, Datta Meghe Institute of Medical Sciences, Wardha-442001, Maharashtra, India, India

Abstract

Clavicle fractures account for about 2.6 to 4 % of all fractures. The best method to treat the displaced midshaft fracture of the clavicle remains a topic of debate. Although there is a large number of studies published about this topic, it is still relatively unknown as to which modality provides better long term functional outcomes and low complications rates. In our study, we have analyzed midshaft clavicle fracture treated with intramedullary device versus conservatively in terms of clinical, functional and radiological outcomes. The mean age of the patients in our study was 35.766 years. Male: Female ratio was 5.0:1.0. The mean time interval between injury and intervention was 2.1 days. Out of 30 patients, 11 patients (36.666%) had left sided fractures, while 19 patients (63.333%) had right sided fractures. Out of 30 patients, 12 patients (40%) had type 2B1 fracture according to Robinson's classification, followed by type 11 patients (36.666%) type 2B2, 6 patients (20%) type 2A1 and 1 patient (3.333%) type 2A2 fracture. Inoperative group, the mean Constant and Murley score before the intervention, at 1 month follow up, 3 months follow up and at 6 months follow up were 47.46, 76.73, 82.8 and 90.73, while in a conservative group, it was 47.53, 71.66, 79.2 and 89.46 respectively. Inoperative group, the mean Q-DASH score before the intervention, at 1 month follow up, 3 months follow up and at 6 months follow up were 29.33, 19.33, 16.86 and 13.8, while in a conservative group, it was 31.266, 22.533, 18.8 and 15.66 respectively. The final outcome, on the basis of the final Constant and Murley score in 13 patients (43.33%), was excellent, 11 patients (36.66%) was good and 6 patients (20%) was fair. Inoperative group, complications were seen in 6 patients (40%), while in the conservative group, complications were seen in 10 patients (66.66%). Thus, the functional, clinical and radiological outcome of the patients managed surgically with an intramedullary device was significantly better when compared with patients treated conservatively.

Full text article

Generated from XML file

References

Canadian, O. T. S. 2007. Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized clinical trial. The Journal of bone and joint surgery, 89(1):1.

Cline, M. E., Herman, J., Shaw, E. R., Morter, D. R. 1992. Standardization of the Visual Analogue Scale. Nursing Research, 41(6):378–380. ISSN: 0029-6562.

Constant, C. R. 1997. An evaluation of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. The Journal of bone and joint surgery, 79(4):695–696.

Crenshaw, J. 1992. Fractures of the shoulder girdle, arm, and forearm. Campbell’s operative orthopaedics, pages 989–1053.

Cunningham, B. P., McLaren, A., Richardson, M., McLemore, R. 2013. Clavicular Length: The Assumption of Symmetry. Orthopedics, 36(3):343–347. ISSN: 0147-7447, 1938-2367.

Eden, L., Ziegler, D., Gilbert, F., Fehske, K., Fenwick, A., Meffert, R. H. 2015. Significant pain reduction and improved functional outcome after surgery for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 10(1):190. ISSN: 1749-799X.

Fu, B. 2016. Minimally invasive intramedullary nailing of clavicular fractures by a new titanium elastic nail. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, 50(5):494–500.

Gadegone, W. M., Lokhande, V. 2018. Screw intramedullary elastic nail fixation in midshaft clavicle fractures: A clinical outcome in 36 patients. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 52(3):322. ISSN: 0019-5413.

Govindasamy, R., Kasirajan, S., Meleppuram, J. J., Thonikadavath, F. 2017. A retrospective study of titanium elastic stable intramedullary nailing in displaced mid-shaft clavicle fractures. Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition), 52(3):270–277. ISSN: 2255-4971.

Gummesson, C., Ward, M. M., Atroshi, I. 2006. The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (Quick DASH): validity and reliability based on responses within the full-length DASH. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 7(1):44. ISSN:1471-2474.

Hill, J. M., Mcguire, M. H., Crosby, L. A. 1997. Closed treatment of displaced middle-third fractures of the clavicle gives poor results. The Journal of bone and joint surgery, 79(4):537–538.

Ledger, M., Leeks, N., Ackland, T., Wang, A. 2005. Short malunions of the clavicle: An anatomic and functional study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 14(4):349–354. ISSN: 1058-2746.

Lewonowski, K., Bassett, G. S. 1992. Complete posterior sternoclavicular epiphyseal separation: a case report and review of the literature. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 281:84–92.

Marinelli, M., Coppa, V., Giudici, L. D., Cecconi, S., Gigante, A. 2017. Midshaft clavicle fractures treatment: threaded Kirschner wire versus conservative approach. Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction, 12(3):141–150. ISSN: 1828-8936, 1828-8928.

Narsaria, N., Singh, A. K., Arun, G. R., Seth, R. R. S. 2014. Surgical fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: elastic intramedullary nailing versus precontoured plating. Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 15(3):165–171. ISSN: 1590-9921, 1590-9999.

Neer, C. S. 1960. Nonunion of the clavicle. Journal of the American Medical Association, 172(10):1006– 1011. ISSN: 0002-9955.

Nordqvist, A., Petersson, C. 1994. The Incidence of Fractures of the Clavicle. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, (300):127–132. ISSN: 0009-921X.

Nowak, J., Mallmin, H., Larsson, S. 2000. The aetiology and epidemiology of clavicular fractures: a prospective study during a two-year period in Uppsala. Injury, (5):353–358.

Postacchini, F., Gumina, S., De Santis, P., Albo, F. 2002. Epidemiology of clavicle fractures. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 11(5):452–456. ISSN: 1058-2746.

Robinson, C. M. 1998. Fractures of the clavicle in the adult: epidemiology and classification. The Journal of bone and joint surgery, 80(3):476–484.

Rowe, C. R. 1968. 4 An Atlas of Anatomy and Treatment of Midclavicular Fractures. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 58:29–42.

Stanley, D., Trowbridge, E. A., Norris, S. H. 1988. The mechanism of clavicular fracture. A clinical and biomechanical analysis. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 70-B(3):461–464. ISSN: 0301-620X, 2044-5377.

Throckmorton, T., Kuhn, J. E. 2007. Fractures of the medial end of the clavicle. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 16(1):49–54. ISSN: 1058-2746.

Wick, M., Müller, E. J., Kollig, E., Muhr, G. 2001. Midshaft fractures of the clavicle with a shortening of more than 2 cm predispose to nonunion. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 121:207–211. ISSN: 0936-8051, 1434-3916.

Authors

Swapnil Date
Kiran Saoji
Kushal Surana
kushmail13@gmail.com (Primary Contact)
Swapnil Date, Kiran Saoji, & Kushal Surana. (2021). Analysis of Fracture Midshaft Clavicle Treated by Intramedullary Device Versus Conservative. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences, 12(4), 2615–2629. Retrieved from https://ijrps.com/home/article/view/530

Article Details

No Related Submission Found