Anteroinferior versus superior plating of XXXX .

@entity1 @entity174 @entity146
BACKGROUND: Open reduction and plate fixation has gained recognition as an effective treatment for certain types of @entity174 . However, 88% of cases report some implant-related problems. To determine the optimal plate position, the aim of the present study was to compare implant-related @entity146 and proportion of plate removal in @entity1 with @entity174 undergoing plate fixation by an anteroinferior or superior approach. METHODS: Retrospectively collected data of 39 @entity1 who underwent anteroinferior plating for displaced @entity174 were compared with prospectively collected data of 60 @entity1 who were treated with superior plate fixation as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Electronic medical records were reviewed for reports of complications, in particular, implant-related @entity146 and implant removal during follow-up. In addition, all @entity1 were contacted in June 2014 to obtain additional information. The primary outcome parameter was implant-related @entity146 . RESULTS: Univariate and multivariate regression analysis showed plate position was not significantly associated with implant-related @entity146 . Higher rates of asymptomatic @entity1 with the plate still in place were observed in the anteroinferior group (46% vs 22%, P = .01). Almost an equal percentage of implant removals was seen in both groups because of implant @entity146 (36% vs 37%, P = .938). CONCLUSIONS: The present study found the surgical approach of clavicular plating was not associated with implant-related @entity146 . Future studies are needed to determine whether there is an optimal approach for clavicle plating.
