ReviewUnfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024
[Surgical access route and choice of implant in the region of the clavicle shaft].
Review in Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes and complication rates of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) versus open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in midshaft clavicular fractures: a comparative study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- [Treatment of clavicle fractures in children and adolescents : Conservative and surgical treatment options with a focus on the figure-of-eight style brace and intrafocal intramedullary nail osteosynthesis].Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClavicle fractures are among the most frequent injuries of the shoulder girdle. Nondisplaced fractures are generally treated conservatively, whereas dislocated fractures require surgical reduction and stabilization. A variety of implants and surgical techniques with reliable results are available. While all techniques provide similar healing rates, they share a common disadvantage with the high incidence of implant irritation and correspondingly high rates of second interventions for material removal.
objectiveThe various surgical techniques for clavicle shaft fractures with their specific areas of application as well as advantages and disadvantages are presented. This review also provides an aid for deciding which surgical technique is most appropriate based on the fracture morphology. Furthermore, an overview of current research activities is presented, with a specific focus on new implants which could help to reduce implant irritation. RESULTS AND
conclusionOpen superior and anteroinferior plate osteosyntheses each show similar reliable results. The minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) technique offers an alternative for multifragmented fractures as it has a lower complication rate compared to the open procedure. Double plate osteosynthesis using minifragment plates shows promising results with respect to the incidence of implant-related irritation. Larger prospective studies are still pending. Intramedullary nailing offers a good alternative, especially if material removal is planned anyway, e.g., in the pediatric setting.
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.