Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures

Introduction Biomechanical studies have proved that locking plates have better primary stability besides versatility regarding fracture pattern while reducing bone contact and bridging the gap, whereas conventional nonlocking plates (plus lag screw) depend on bone-plate compression. The clinical ben...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Foot and ankle specialist 2022-11, p.19386400221136757-19386400221136757
Hauptverfasser: Schagemann, Jan C., Neumann, Hanjo, Schäfers, Jana, Paech, Andreas, Wendlandt, Robert, Oheim, Ralf, Schulz, Arndt Peter
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 19386400221136757
container_issue
container_start_page 19386400221136757
container_title Foot and ankle specialist
container_volume
creator Schagemann, Jan C.
Neumann, Hanjo
Schäfers, Jana
Paech, Andreas
Wendlandt, Robert
Oheim, Ralf
Schulz, Arndt Peter
description Introduction Biomechanical studies have proved that locking plates have better primary stability besides versatility regarding fracture pattern while reducing bone contact and bridging the gap, whereas conventional nonlocking plates (plus lag screw) depend on bone-plate compression. The clinical benefit of locking plates over nonlocking plates remains unanswered, however. Therefore, this retrospective cohort study was set up to test the hypothesis that the use of locking plates for unstable ankle fractures will result in fewer re-displacements, superior bony healing, and functional and clinical outcomes better than observed in the nonlocking cohort. Methods Bimalleolar ankle fractures (AO 44-B2) without syndesmotic injury treated with either a locking or a nonlocking plate were included. Groups were compared for complications, bone healing, secondary dislocation, progressions of osteoarthritis, and clinical outcome using patient-reported outcome measures. Results Data revealed no clinical outcome differences (Olerud-Molander Ankle Score: nonlocking 88.2 ± 14.4, locking 88.8 ± 12.3, P = .69, robust two 1-sided test for equality (RTOST): P = .03; American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score: nonlocking 91.2 ± 12.9, locking 91.8 ± 11.3, P = .96, RTOST: P = .04). Nevertheless, a significant postoperative progression of osteoarthritis was detected in both groups (P = .04). This was independent of implant (P = .16). Although difference was not significant, locking plates were preferred in older (P = .78) and sicker patients (P = .63) and in cases with severer osteoarthritis (P = .16), and were associated with a higher complication rate (P = .42) and secondary dislocation (nonlocking 9.4%, locking 18.2%; P = .42). Re-displacement, however, was not a compelling reason for revision. Conclusions The present study shows statistically significant equality of both types of implants. Contrary to our expectation, locking plates seemed to be associated with a higher risk for re-displacement. Overall, the use of either locking or nonlocking plates for unstable AO 44-B2 fractures is safe and successful despite significant progression of osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: III, Retrospective observational cohort study
doi_str_mv 10.1177/19386400221136757
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2739741938</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_19386400221136757</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2739741938</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1857-6cfe7b9b4f3e637936de3de801df89de734c67280c46efbca17d188410df8ad63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kLFOwzAQhi0EoqXwACzII0uKHbt2MpaIAlKlIFHmyHUuxW1iFzsB9e1J1cKCxHS_7r77hw-ha0rGlEp5R1OWCE5IHFPKhJzIEzTc7yIpmDg95j0wQBchrAkRRHBxjgZMcJqkbDJEX6-mMbXyOKuNNVrVOO9a7RrAxuK50xtjV1jZEmfOfoJtjbM981KrFnAeWnBhZ9t3CCbgynncR7zwoNqmZ7Gr8DTHnEf3MZ7aTQ145pVuOw_hEp1Vqg5wdZwj9DZ7WGRP0Tx_fM6m80jTZCIjoSuQy3TJKwaCyZSJElgJCaFllaQlSMa1kHFCNBdQLbWisqRJwinp76oUbIRuD71b7z46CG3RmKChrpUF14UiliyVfC-qR-kB1d6F4KEqtt40yu8KSoq97-KP7_7n5ljfLRsofz9-BPfA-AAEtYJi7Trf-wv_NH4Dg6yIDw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2739741938</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Schagemann, Jan C. ; Neumann, Hanjo ; Schäfers, Jana ; Paech, Andreas ; Wendlandt, Robert ; Oheim, Ralf ; Schulz, Arndt Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>Schagemann, Jan C. ; Neumann, Hanjo ; Schäfers, Jana ; Paech, Andreas ; Wendlandt, Robert ; Oheim, Ralf ; Schulz, Arndt Peter</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction Biomechanical studies have proved that locking plates have better primary stability besides versatility regarding fracture pattern while reducing bone contact and bridging the gap, whereas conventional nonlocking plates (plus lag screw) depend on bone-plate compression. The clinical benefit of locking plates over nonlocking plates remains unanswered, however. Therefore, this retrospective cohort study was set up to test the hypothesis that the use of locking plates for unstable ankle fractures will result in fewer re-displacements, superior bony healing, and functional and clinical outcomes better than observed in the nonlocking cohort. Methods Bimalleolar ankle fractures (AO 44-B2) without syndesmotic injury treated with either a locking or a nonlocking plate were included. Groups were compared for complications, bone healing, secondary dislocation, progressions of osteoarthritis, and clinical outcome using patient-reported outcome measures. Results Data revealed no clinical outcome differences (Olerud-Molander Ankle Score: nonlocking 88.2 ± 14.4, locking 88.8 ± 12.3, P = .69, robust two 1-sided test for equality (RTOST): P = .03; American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score: nonlocking 91.2 ± 12.9, locking 91.8 ± 11.3, P = .96, RTOST: P = .04). Nevertheless, a significant postoperative progression of osteoarthritis was detected in both groups (P = .04). This was independent of implant (P = .16). Although difference was not significant, locking plates were preferred in older (P = .78) and sicker patients (P = .63) and in cases with severer osteoarthritis (P = .16), and were associated with a higher complication rate (P = .42) and secondary dislocation (nonlocking 9.4%, locking 18.2%; P = .42). Re-displacement, however, was not a compelling reason for revision. Conclusions The present study shows statistically significant equality of both types of implants. Contrary to our expectation, locking plates seemed to be associated with a higher risk for re-displacement. Overall, the use of either locking or nonlocking plates for unstable AO 44-B2 fractures is safe and successful despite significant progression of osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: III, Retrospective observational cohort study</description><identifier>ISSN: 1938-6400</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-7636</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/19386400221136757</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36418935</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>Foot and ankle specialist, 2022-11, p.19386400221136757-19386400221136757</ispartof><rights>2022 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1857-6cfe7b9b4f3e637936de3de801df89de734c67280c46efbca17d188410df8ad63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1857-6cfe7b9b4f3e637936de3de801df89de734c67280c46efbca17d188410df8ad63</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5122-5897 ; 0000-0002-4927-549X ; 0000-0001-6368-1622</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/19386400221136757$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/19386400221136757$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36418935$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schagemann, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neumann, Hanjo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schäfers, Jana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paech, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wendlandt, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oheim, Ralf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulz, Arndt Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures</title><title>Foot and ankle specialist</title><addtitle>Foot Ankle Spec</addtitle><description>Introduction Biomechanical studies have proved that locking plates have better primary stability besides versatility regarding fracture pattern while reducing bone contact and bridging the gap, whereas conventional nonlocking plates (plus lag screw) depend on bone-plate compression. The clinical benefit of locking plates over nonlocking plates remains unanswered, however. Therefore, this retrospective cohort study was set up to test the hypothesis that the use of locking plates for unstable ankle fractures will result in fewer re-displacements, superior bony healing, and functional and clinical outcomes better than observed in the nonlocking cohort. Methods Bimalleolar ankle fractures (AO 44-B2) without syndesmotic injury treated with either a locking or a nonlocking plate were included. Groups were compared for complications, bone healing, secondary dislocation, progressions of osteoarthritis, and clinical outcome using patient-reported outcome measures. Results Data revealed no clinical outcome differences (Olerud-Molander Ankle Score: nonlocking 88.2 ± 14.4, locking 88.8 ± 12.3, P = .69, robust two 1-sided test for equality (RTOST): P = .03; American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score: nonlocking 91.2 ± 12.9, locking 91.8 ± 11.3, P = .96, RTOST: P = .04). Nevertheless, a significant postoperative progression of osteoarthritis was detected in both groups (P = .04). This was independent of implant (P = .16). Although difference was not significant, locking plates were preferred in older (P = .78) and sicker patients (P = .63) and in cases with severer osteoarthritis (P = .16), and were associated with a higher complication rate (P = .42) and secondary dislocation (nonlocking 9.4%, locking 18.2%; P = .42). Re-displacement, however, was not a compelling reason for revision. Conclusions The present study shows statistically significant equality of both types of implants. Contrary to our expectation, locking plates seemed to be associated with a higher risk for re-displacement. Overall, the use of either locking or nonlocking plates for unstable AO 44-B2 fractures is safe and successful despite significant progression of osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: III, Retrospective observational cohort study</description><issn>1938-6400</issn><issn>1938-7636</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kLFOwzAQhi0EoqXwACzII0uKHbt2MpaIAlKlIFHmyHUuxW1iFzsB9e1J1cKCxHS_7r77hw-ha0rGlEp5R1OWCE5IHFPKhJzIEzTc7yIpmDg95j0wQBchrAkRRHBxjgZMcJqkbDJEX6-mMbXyOKuNNVrVOO9a7RrAxuK50xtjV1jZEmfOfoJtjbM981KrFnAeWnBhZ9t3CCbgynncR7zwoNqmZ7Gr8DTHnEf3MZ7aTQ145pVuOw_hEp1Vqg5wdZwj9DZ7WGRP0Tx_fM6m80jTZCIjoSuQy3TJKwaCyZSJElgJCaFllaQlSMa1kHFCNBdQLbWisqRJwinp76oUbIRuD71b7z46CG3RmKChrpUF14UiliyVfC-qR-kB1d6F4KEqtt40yu8KSoq97-KP7_7n5ljfLRsofz9-BPfA-AAEtYJi7Trf-wv_NH4Dg6yIDw</recordid><startdate>20221123</startdate><enddate>20221123</enddate><creator>Schagemann, Jan C.</creator><creator>Neumann, Hanjo</creator><creator>Schäfers, Jana</creator><creator>Paech, Andreas</creator><creator>Wendlandt, Robert</creator><creator>Oheim, Ralf</creator><creator>Schulz, Arndt Peter</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5122-5897</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4927-549X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6368-1622</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221123</creationdate><title>Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures</title><author>Schagemann, Jan C. ; Neumann, Hanjo ; Schäfers, Jana ; Paech, Andreas ; Wendlandt, Robert ; Oheim, Ralf ; Schulz, Arndt Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1857-6cfe7b9b4f3e637936de3de801df89de734c67280c46efbca17d188410df8ad63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schagemann, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neumann, Hanjo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schäfers, Jana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paech, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wendlandt, Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oheim, Ralf</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schulz, Arndt Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Foot and ankle specialist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schagemann, Jan C.</au><au>Neumann, Hanjo</au><au>Schäfers, Jana</au><au>Paech, Andreas</au><au>Wendlandt, Robert</au><au>Oheim, Ralf</au><au>Schulz, Arndt Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures</atitle><jtitle>Foot and ankle specialist</jtitle><addtitle>Foot Ankle Spec</addtitle><date>2022-11-23</date><risdate>2022</risdate><spage>19386400221136757</spage><epage>19386400221136757</epage><pages>19386400221136757-19386400221136757</pages><issn>1938-6400</issn><eissn>1938-7636</eissn><abstract>Introduction Biomechanical studies have proved that locking plates have better primary stability besides versatility regarding fracture pattern while reducing bone contact and bridging the gap, whereas conventional nonlocking plates (plus lag screw) depend on bone-plate compression. The clinical benefit of locking plates over nonlocking plates remains unanswered, however. Therefore, this retrospective cohort study was set up to test the hypothesis that the use of locking plates for unstable ankle fractures will result in fewer re-displacements, superior bony healing, and functional and clinical outcomes better than observed in the nonlocking cohort. Methods Bimalleolar ankle fractures (AO 44-B2) without syndesmotic injury treated with either a locking or a nonlocking plate were included. Groups were compared for complications, bone healing, secondary dislocation, progressions of osteoarthritis, and clinical outcome using patient-reported outcome measures. Results Data revealed no clinical outcome differences (Olerud-Molander Ankle Score: nonlocking 88.2 ± 14.4, locking 88.8 ± 12.3, P = .69, robust two 1-sided test for equality (RTOST): P = .03; American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score: nonlocking 91.2 ± 12.9, locking 91.8 ± 11.3, P = .96, RTOST: P = .04). Nevertheless, a significant postoperative progression of osteoarthritis was detected in both groups (P = .04). This was independent of implant (P = .16). Although difference was not significant, locking plates were preferred in older (P = .78) and sicker patients (P = .63) and in cases with severer osteoarthritis (P = .16), and were associated with a higher complication rate (P = .42) and secondary dislocation (nonlocking 9.4%, locking 18.2%; P = .42). Re-displacement, however, was not a compelling reason for revision. Conclusions The present study shows statistically significant equality of both types of implants. Contrary to our expectation, locking plates seemed to be associated with a higher risk for re-displacement. Overall, the use of either locking or nonlocking plates for unstable AO 44-B2 fractures is safe and successful despite significant progression of osteoarthritis. Level of Evidence: III, Retrospective observational cohort study</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>36418935</pmid><doi>10.1177/19386400221136757</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5122-5897</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4927-549X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6368-1622</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1938-6400
ispartof Foot and ankle specialist, 2022-11, p.19386400221136757-19386400221136757
issn 1938-6400
1938-7636
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2739741938
source SAGE Complete
title Similar Clinical Outcome in Locking and Conventional Plate Osteosynthesis for the Treatment of AO 44-B2 Ankle Fractures
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T11%3A17%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Similar%20Clinical%20Outcome%20in%20Locking%20and%20Conventional%20Plate%20Osteosynthesis%20for%20the%20Treatment%20of%20AO%2044-B2%20Ankle%20Fractures&rft.jtitle=Foot%20and%20ankle%20specialist&rft.au=Schagemann,%20Jan%20C.&rft.date=2022-11-23&rft.spage=19386400221136757&rft.epage=19386400221136757&rft.pages=19386400221136757-19386400221136757&rft.issn=1938-6400&rft.eissn=1938-7636&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/19386400221136757&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2739741938%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2739741938&rft_id=info:pmid/36418935&rft_sage_id=10.1177_19386400221136757&rfr_iscdi=true