University of Sao Paulo - Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology
São Paulo, 05403-010, Brazil
NCT Number: NCT01410032
The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic results of patients with midshaft clavicular fractures treated with plates or intramedullary flexible nails fixation.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me16 year–65 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 2
São Paulo, 05403-010, Brazil
Midshaft clavicular fractures are classically treated with non-surgical methods, supported by many authors as an effective treatment. However, different researches have shown high rates of nonunion and clavicle malunion related to the nonoperative treatment. Currently, indications for surgical treatment are wider and include mainly the following: shortening greater than or equal to 2.0 cm, multiple trauma, open fractures or with imminent exposure and associated neurovascular injury.
Plate fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures is widely described in the literature, and is considered the gold standard by different authors, associated with a high union rate and a low complication rate. Different types of plates have been used, including reconstruction plates, dynamic compression plates (DCP), low-contact dynamic compression plates (LC-DCP), semi-tubular plates, and pre-molded locking plates. Possible complications are postoperative infection, hardware loosening or failure, peri-incision paresthesia, neurovascular iatrogenic lesions, nonunion, and hardware related symptoms.
Elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) technique has been used in recent years in the treatment of midshaft clavicular fractures. Different studies report excellent functional results and low complication rates. Some theoretical advantages in relation to plates are the 3-point flexible nail support, which provides superior biomechanics resistance and uses the relative stability principle, favoring callus formation. When compared to plain steel wires, titanium nails have lower migration risk, due to its greater flexibility and better bone fixation.
The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic results of patients with midshaft clavicular fractures treated with reconstruction plates or ESIN.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Reconstruction plate
ESIN (Elastic Stable Intramedullary Nailing)
Time frame: 6 months
Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (0: best function; 100: worst function)
Time frame: 12 months
Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (0: best function; 100: worst function)
Time frame: 6 and 12 months PO
Shoulder functional score (0: worst function; 100: best function)
Time frame: Monthly
Time necessary to reach complete union measured in weeks
Time frame: 6 months
Clavicles shortening compared to the contralateral side
Time frame: 6 and 12 months
Subjective measurement. Patients are questioned about their satisfaction with the treatment instituted. Binary outcome.
Time frame: Monthly
Complications were divided in Minor and Major, as follows:
Minor: paresthesia, transient neurologic deficit, implant deformation, partial implant migration, acromioclavicular or sternoclavicular pain, hardware related pain
Major: permanent neurologic deficit, total implant failure, total implant migration, refracture, reoperation, nonunion
University of Sao Paulo
Other
Reconstruction Plate Compared With Flexible Intramedullary Nailing for Midshaft Clavicular Fractures: a Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06050473
Clavicle Fracture, Fractures, Bone
View Trial DetailsNCT03577678
Bone Fracture, Bone Lesion
Cairo, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT00872105
Clavicle Fracture, Fractures
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
View Trial DetailsNCT07052721
Ankle Arthropathy, Clavicle Fracture
La Jolla, California, United States
View Trial Details