Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2017
Prospective randomized study comparing results of fixation for clavicular shaft fractures with intramedullary nail or locking compression plate.
Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intramedullary fixation versus plate fixation in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Early Versus Delayed Surgery for Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: A Systematic Review.The Iowa orthopaedic journal · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Review
- Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2020Article
- An evaluation of treatment options for medial, midshaft, and distal clavicle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES international · 2020Review
- Surgical approach for open reduction and internal fixation of clavicle fractures: a comparison of vertical and horizontal incisions.International orthopaedics · 2019Article
- Midshaft clavicle fractures: Current concepts.EFORT open reviews · 2018Article
- Radiological, clinical and functional evaluation using the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire of children with medial epicondyle fractures treated surgically.International orthopaedics · 2017Article
- Open reduction and internal fixation with plating is beneficial in the early recovery stage for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures in patients aged 30-65 years old.Tzu chi medical journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo reveal whether minimal invasive implantation of a novel intramedullary device produces comparable outcomes with LCP fixation in patients with displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.
methodsA prospective randomized two-arm study was performed on patients presenting with Robinson type 2B1 and 2B2 displaced midshaft clavicle fractures with >2 cm shortening. In group 1 (n = 35, mean age; 42.02 ± 13.87) patients received minimal invasive intramedullary fixation with Sonoma Crx device (Sonoma, USA) whereas in group 2 (n = 40, mean age; 39.07 ± 7.04) patients received 3.5 mm locking compression plate (Synthes, USA). Functional assessment was made using range of motion measurement (ROM), constant shoulder score and DASH disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) scoring.
resultsMean time of operation was similar between the two groups (p = 0.46) whereas mean time of fluoroscopy was significantly longer in group 1 compared to group 2 (p < 0.001). At the 12 month follow-up, there was a slight but significant difference in ROM degrees between the two groups (p = 0.005). Mean quick DASH score was significantly lower in group 1 than that in group 2 (p < 0.001) whereas there was no significant difference in constant shoulder scores between the two groups (p = 0.06). Time to bony union was also shorter in group 1 compared to group 2 (p < 0.001).
conclusionMinimal invasive intramedullary implantation technique provided satisfactory clinical outcomes and shortened the time until bony union compared to LCP fixation. Further study on larger populations is required to establish whether the technique offers lower complication rates than LCP fixation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.