Operative fixation for midshaft clavicular fractures: outcomes, costs and complications .
Cette étude a été identifiée comme étant potentiellement à fort impact.
L'indicateur High Impact de l'ENP, basé sur l'IA, estime l'influence qu'un article est susceptible d'avoir en intégrant des signaux provenant à la fois de la revue dans laquelle il est publié et du contenu scientifique de l'article lui-même.
Développé à l'aide d'un traitement du langage naturel de pointe, le modèle High Impact de l'ENP prédit avec plus de précision les futures citations d'une étude que le seul facteur d'impact de la revue.
Cela permet d'identifier plus tôt les recherches cliniquement significatives et aide les lecteurs à se concentrer sur les articles les plus susceptibles d'influencer les pratiques futures.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(20):12 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Sep 4;95(17):1576-84Two hundred patients, aged 16 to 60 years, with a completely displaced midshaft clavicular fracture were randomized to evaluate the efficacy of open reduction and plate fixation, against nonoperative treatments. Patients were assessed over 12 months for union, functional outcomes (DASH, Constant Score, and SF-12), complications, and cost of procedures. The evidence presented in this study demonstrated that operative treatments for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures result in lower rates of nonunion and superior functional outcomes, but is associated with higher implant-related complications and heavier costs. The authors of this study indicated a reluctance to accept operative fixation as the routine procedure for displaced midshaft clavicular fracture.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
3/4
Randomization
2/4
Outcome Measurements
3/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Evidence based consensus on the appropriate treatment for these injuries is lacking. Operative fixation for midshaft clavicular fractures has gleaned more popularity compared to the conventional nonoperative treatment options, but final consensus on a routine policy for treatment remains controversial. Operative treatments have been associated with lower rates of nonunion, shorter time to union and better functional outcomes but have contributed to higher rates of complications. This study was therefore needed to provide further evidence on the comparison between operative and nonoperative treatment for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
Does open reduction and plate fixation in the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures present better outcomes compared against nonoperative treatment, measured over 12 months?
- Open reduction and plate fixation induced a significantly lower risk of nonunion with a 93% reduction in the risk compared against nonoperative procedures (p= 0.007): 16 of 92 nonoperative patients had nonunion, and 13 of these patients underwent secondary surgery. 8 had delayed union, resolving between 6 and 12 months. 1 of 86 (1.2%) operative group patients presented with nonunion and no delayed unions were reported.
- Treatment group allocation was independently predictive of nonunion on multivariate analysis (p= 0.0001) and smoking was significantly associated with nonunion (p= 0.006). Age, sex, increasing fracture displacement, and comminution were not predictive of nonunion on multivariate analysis or significantly associated with nonunion (each p> 0.05)
- DASH and Constant score evaluations revealed significantly favorable outcomes for both groups within 12 months (p< 0.001 for all), but mean functional scores were better for operatively treated patients at 3 (p< 0.05) and 12 months (Mean Dash: 3.4; Constant Score 92.0) compared to the nonoperative scores (Mean Dash: 6.1; Constant Score 87.8; p= 0.01). Constant score at 6 weeks and 6 months, and the DASH score at 6 months were not significantly different between groups (p> 0.05)
- SF-12 Scores between groups revealed no statistical differences. No differences between groups was apparent for active or passive shoulder ROM, or absences from work or sport (each p> 0.05). Comparisons for Local sensitivity/ irritation between groups revealed no significant differences (p= 0.2). 17 operative group patients compared to 11 nonoperative group patients expressed dissatisfaction.
- The number of patients at every assessment reporting dissatisfaction with shoulder drooping, clavicular bump at the fracture site, and shoulder asymmetry, was significantly lower in the open reduction and fixation group compared to the nonoperative group (p< 0.05 at each).
- Operative group patients presented with local symptoms of headache, hardware prominence, weather sensitivity, and incisional numbness. 10 (12%) patients subsequently underwent plate removal. No other unresolved intraoperative complications, postoperative neurological deficits, or deep infections were apparent.
- No significant differences between groups was apparent for overall number of secondary operative procedures or mandatory operations: 17 (18.5%) nonoperative group patients underwent secondary operative interventions within 12 months with 13 of 17 treatments considered mandatory for the treatment of nonunion. 16 (18.6%) operative group patients underwent secondary operative interventions with 5 of 16 considered mandatory for nonunion refracture and plate complications.
- Open reduction and plate fixation procedures presented with greater initial expenditure compared to nonoperative treatments. The cost of secondary reconstructive treatment fixations was higher during the first 12 months in the nonoperative group, but the overall cost of treatment in the 12 months after injury was significantly higher in the operative group (mean $2265.24 nonoperative versus $10,165.43; p< 0.001)
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
Rates of nonunion were significantly reduced through open reduction and plate fixation when compared against nonoperative treatments for displaced midshaft clavical fractures. Nonoperative treatment was independently predictive of the development of nonunion. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores, along with Constant scores were significantly better with operative treatment at 12 months. However, when patients with nonunion were excluded from analysis, no significant differences in these scores were apparent. Operatively treated patients were less dissatisfied with symptoms of shoulder droop, local bump at the fracture site, and shoulder asymmetry compared to nonoperatively treated patients. Finally, open reduction and plate fixation was associated with significantly greater costs of treatment.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
Open reduction and plate fixation is superior for functional outcomes and rates of nonunion in patients suffering from displaced midshaft clavicular fracture when compared against nonoperative treatment, but the functional outcomes seem to be tied to the rates of nonunion. Operative treatment is expensive and associated with implant-related complications that do not arise with nonoperative treatment. For these reasons routine operative treatment cannot yet be supported for all patients. Future studies should aim to identify subgroups of patients that present with the greatest benefit of undertaking open reduction and plate fixation.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
