Conventional incision versus oblique mini-incision for midshaft clavicular fractures
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7600.2018.02.002
- VernacularTitle:斜行小切口和传统横行切口治疗锁骨中段骨折的疗效比较
- Author:
Renbin LI
1
;
Shengren XIONG
;
Guosheng XIONG
;
Fengfei LIN
Author Information
1. 350007,厦门大学附属福州市第二医院骨科
- Keywords:
Clavicle;
Fractures,bone;
Bone plates;
Fracture fixation,internal;
Incision
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
2018;20(2):99-104
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the clinical effects of conventional incision versus oblique mini-incision in the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. Methods A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed between August 2014 and August 2016 in 79 patients with acute displaced midshaft clavicular fracture. They were randomly divided into 2 groups to receive either conventional incision or oblique mini-incision treatment. In the oblique mini-incision group, there were 37 cases, 20 males and 17 females, with an average age of 37.4 ± 13.2 years. By the Robinson fracture classification, there were 9 cases of type 2A2, 16 ones of type 2B1, and 12 ones of type 2B2. In the conventional incision group, there were 42 cases, 22 males and 20 females, with an average age of 38.2 ± 14.5 years. By the Robinson fracture classification, there were 9 cases of type 2A2, 19 ones of type 2B1, and 14 ones of type 2B2. We recorded operation time, intraoperative blood loss, scar size, clinical complications and fracture healing time. Functional assessments were conducted at l2 months using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley scores, and a questionnaire on numbness, scar appearance and satis-faction. Results Only 58 patients finished a complete follow-up. The preoperative general data showed no statistical significance between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). All the 58 patients were followed up for 13 to 24 months (average, 15.3 months). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in operation time, fracture healing time, the DASH or Constant-Murley score, or clinical complications (P> 0.05). However, the intraoperative blood loss in the oblique mini-incision group (20.8 ± 10.7 mL) was significantly less than that in the conventional incision group (41.6 ± 7.6 mL), the scar size in the former (3.6 ± 1.6 cm) significantly shorter than that in the latter (10.3 ± 2.6 cm), and the rate of symptoms of residual injury to the supra-clavicular nerve in the former (10.7%, 3/28) significantly lower than that in the latter (43.3%, 13/30) (P <0.05). Moreover, the oblique mini-incision group was significantly better than the conventional incision group in numbness on the shoulder or anterior chest, scar appearance and satisfaction. Conclusions The oblique mini-incision may be advantageous over the conventional incision in intraoperative blood loss, scar size and appearance, iatrogenic supraclavicular nerve damage and satisfaction. However, the 2 incisions may lead to similar functional recovery of the shoulder.
