Frequency and complications after operative fixation of clavicular fractures

• Published in: Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery Vol. 25; no. 5; pp. e125 - e129
• Main Authors: Navarro, Ronald A., MD, Gelber, Jonathan D., MD, Harrast, John J., MS, Seiler, John G., MD, Jackson, Kent R., MD, Garcia, Ivan A., MD
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.05.2016
• Subjects: ABOS; Adult; Clavicle; Clavicle - injuries; Clavicle - surgery; Complications; Databases, Factual; Female; Fixation; Fracture; Fracture Fixation, Internal - adverse effects; Fracture Fixation, Internal - trends; Fractures, Bone - surgery; Humans; Internal Fixators - adverse effects; Male; Open Fracture Reduction - adverse effects; Open Fracture Reduction - trends; Orthopedics; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - etiology; Prosthesis Failure; Rate; Shoulder; United States - epidemiology; Epidemiology Study; Fixation; Clavicle; Complications; Rate; Shoulder; Large Database Analysis; Fracture; ABOS
• ISSN: 1058-2746; 1532-6500
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.11.065

Background The purpose of this study was to analyze whether a recent trend in evidence supporting operative treatment of clavicular fractures is matched with an increase in operative fixation and complication rates in the United States. Methods The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery database was reviewed for cases with Current Procedural Terminology (American Medical Association, Chicago, IL, USA) code 23515 (clavicle open reduction internal fixation [ORIF]) from 1999 to 2010. The procedure rate for each year and the number of procedures for each candidate performing clavicle ORIF were calculated to determine if a change had occurred in the frequency of ORIF for clavicular fractures. Complication and outcome data were also reviewed. Results In 2010 vs, 1999, there were statistically significant increases in the mean number of clavicle ORIF performed among all candidates (0.89 vs. 0.13; P  < .0001) and in the mean number of clavicle ORIF per candidate performing clavicle ORIF (2.47 vs. 1.20, P  < .0473). The difference in the percentage of part II candidates performing clavicle ORIF from the start to the end of the study (11% vs. 36%) was significant ( P  < .0001). There was a significant increase in the clavicle ORIF percentage of total cases (0.11% vs. 0.74%, P  < .0001). The most common complication was hardware failure (4%). Conclusion The rate of ORIF of clavicular fractures has increased in candidates taking part II of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery, with a low complication rate. The increase in operative fixation during this interval may have been influenced by literature suggesting improved outcomes in patients treated with operative stabilization of their clavicular fracture.