PURPOSE: Surgical management of the lateral end of clavicle fractures has been a challenge for orthopedic surgeons considering the high rate of non-union. There has been no right and wrong answer to these types of fractures and many methods discussed in the literature, but the 2 most used bony procedures are hook plate and locking plate with or without the use of supplementary soft tissue procedures. The available evidence, in this case, is scarce with questionable reliability. The idea of this systemic review is to promote evidence-based practice when choosing between the 2 implants for this fracture. This study aims to review the results by performing a systemic review of the literature comparing the results of locking plate vs. hook plate for the lateral end of clavicle fracture fixation with an emphasis on outcome and associated complications. METHODS: A search of the literature was made with the keyword "clavicle" in PubMed/Ovid Medline/Embase and University of Edinburgh online library "discover Ed". A total of 4063 articles were identified including case series (with at least 3 cases) and review articles focusing on locking plate alone, comparisons of locking plate and hook plate, or hook plate alone. Articles were excluded if they were not published in English, focused on pediatric studies, or consisted only of book chapters. Studies examining tension band wiring, soft tissue procedures for fracture fixation, arthroscopic-assisted procedures, additional soft tissue procedures along with plate fixation, and fracture dislocation of the lateral end of the clavicle were also excluded. The search was then narrowed down to 21 articles after consideration of inclusion and exclusion criteria. A detailed review of the surgical methodology further excluded additional soft tissue procedures, resulting in a final selection of 15 studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Modified Coleman Score by the authors. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies related to Neer type II fracture met the inclusion criteria. However, 2 other studies also included type V fracture as well. The mean age of patients in these studies was 32 years. The mean follow-up period was 24.3 months (ranging from 6 to 65 months). The time of radiological union was documented from 2 to 4.5 months. Constant and disabilities of arm, shoulder, and hand scores were most used as the criteria for patient outcomes. The size of the lateral fragment that can accommodate/provide bicortical fracture was documented in only 3 studies. The mean incidence of removal of hook plate was 86.9%. In contrast, the mean incidence of removal of locking plate was 27.0%. Superficial wound infection was documented in 5 studies and deep wound infection was seen in 1 study. The mean union rate for hook plate was 97.0% compared to 100% for locking plate. Complications associated with hook plate have been documented in 11 studies. The most commonly reported incidence of complication was acromial osteolysis. The quality of studies was assessed using modified Coleman score. Other than 2 studies that were considered for the study that met the "fair" standard all of them were considered "poor" based on the modified Coleman score. CONCLUSION Both hook plate and locking plate provide acceptable operative treatment options for the lateral end of clavicle fracture. However, a consideration of surgeons' experience, the likelihood of a second operation, and the size of the lateral fragment should be considered when choosing between the 2 types of implants.
Humans ; Clavicle/surgery* ; Bone Plates ; Fractures, Bone/surgery* ; Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation*

Methods: The study included 200 patients (164 females, 36 males) undergoing primary TKR. Follow-up was performed at 4 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Lumbar spine and knee symptom improvements were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Oxford Knee Score, respectively. Results: All 200 patients undergoing bilateral TKR presented with radiographic lumbar spine degenerative pathology; 60% (n=120) of the patients presented with moderate to severe clinical symptoms of lumbar spondylosis, including 54% (n=108) with degenerative lumbar spondylosis and lumbar canal stenosis and 6% (n=12) with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Of the 120 patients who presented with lumbar spine problems, 90% (n=108) reported improvement in their symptoms; the ODI score improved from 42.5%±4.1% preoperative score to 15.6%±2.3% postoperative score (p -value<0.001). Of the 12 patients with no improvement, 10 patients underwent percutaneous procedures for their lumbar spine pathology with good results, one patient underwent surgery, and one declined any intervention. Conclusions A significant number of patients (60%) undergoing bilateral TKR also present with symptomatic lumbar spine problems. Patients with mild to moderate lumbar spine degenerative symptoms and no associated severe radiating pain on activity are more likely to experience relief of their symptoms post-TKR.