Treatment of both bone forearm fractures with 2.7 mm plates: a non-inferiority study.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Michael C Harrington, Blake Nourie, Dana Perim, Amit Ratanpal, Gokul Kalyanasundaram, Patrick Marinello
{"title":"Treatment of both bone forearm fractures with 2.7 mm plates: a non-inferiority study.","authors":"Michael C Harrington, Blake Nourie, Dana Perim, Amit Ratanpal, Gokul Kalyanasundaram, Patrick Marinello","doi":"10.1007/s00402-024-05692-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the effectiveness of 2.7 mm plates in treating both bone forearm fractures (BBFFs) compared to the current gold standard of 3.5 mm fixation. More specifically, to determine if 2.7 mm plates are non-inferior to the current standard of 3.5 mm plates.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective including patients from 2016-2021.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Single institution, level-1 trauma academic medical center.</p><p><strong>Patients/participants: </strong>77 patients met inclusion criteria, 58 patients underwent fixation with 3.5 mm plates and 19 underwent fixation with 2.7 mm plates.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Plate osteosynthesis with either 2.7 mm or 3.5 mm plate instrumentation.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure: </strong>Maintenance of reduction and achievement of fracture union.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 77 total patients, 19 received 2.7 mm plates and 58 received 3.5 mm plates. There was no difference in age and BMI between groups, but the 2.7 mm group had fewer males (47% vs 79%, p = 0.02). Primary end points of achievement of union (89.5% vs. 79.3%, p = 0.39) and maintenance of reduction (100% vs. 94.8%, p = 0.99), and secondary end points of implant removal (15.8% vs. 13.8%, p = 0.79), return to the operating room (OR) (5.3% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.63), and minor complications (0% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.99) were similar between the 2.7 mm and 3.5 mm groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study challenges the current standard of ORIF using 3.5 mm plates for diaphyseal forearm fractures. 2.7 mm plating resulted in at least equivocal achievement of fracture union and thus may be more efficacious given previous studies showing lower refracture risks after implant removal.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, retrospective cohort study.</p>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":"145 1","pages":"134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05692-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of 2.7 mm plates in treating both bone forearm fractures (BBFFs) compared to the current gold standard of 3.5 mm fixation. More specifically, to determine if 2.7 mm plates are non-inferior to the current standard of 3.5 mm plates.

Design: Retrospective including patients from 2016-2021.

Setting: Single institution, level-1 trauma academic medical center.

Patients/participants: 77 patients met inclusion criteria, 58 patients underwent fixation with 3.5 mm plates and 19 underwent fixation with 2.7 mm plates.

Intervention: Plate osteosynthesis with either 2.7 mm or 3.5 mm plate instrumentation.

Main outcome measure: Maintenance of reduction and achievement of fracture union.

Results: Among 77 total patients, 19 received 2.7 mm plates and 58 received 3.5 mm plates. There was no difference in age and BMI between groups, but the 2.7 mm group had fewer males (47% vs 79%, p = 0.02). Primary end points of achievement of union (89.5% vs. 79.3%, p = 0.39) and maintenance of reduction (100% vs. 94.8%, p = 0.99), and secondary end points of implant removal (15.8% vs. 13.8%, p = 0.79), return to the operating room (OR) (5.3% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.63), and minor complications (0% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.99) were similar between the 2.7 mm and 3.5 mm groups.

Conclusion: This study challenges the current standard of ORIF using 3.5 mm plates for diaphyseal forearm fractures. 2.7 mm plating resulted in at least equivocal achievement of fracture union and thus may be more efficacious given previous studies showing lower refracture risks after implant removal.

Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信