| Literature DB >> 35407594 |
Rainer Mittermayr1,2,3, Nicolas Haffner2,3, Sebastian Eder1, Jonas Flatscher2, Wolfgang Schaden1,2,3, Paul Slezak2,3, Cyrill Slezak2,3,4.
Abstract
A delay or failure to heal is the most common possible complication in clavicle fractures, especially in cases primarily treated conservatively. As the current standard therapy, surgical revision achieves good healing results, but is associated with potential surgery-related complications. Shockwave therapy as a non-invasive therapy shows similar reasonable consolidation rates in the non-union of different localizations, but avoids complications. Compromised clavicle fractures in the middle and lateral third treated with focused high-energy shockwave therapy were compared with those treated with surgical revision (ORIF). In addition, a three-dimensional computer simulation for evaluating the pressure distribution during shockwave application accompanied the clinical study. A comparable healing rate in bony consolidation was achieved in both groups. Significantly fewer complications, however, occurred in the shockwave group. The simulations showed safe application in this instance, particularly in avoiding lung tissue affection. When applied correctly, shockwaves represent a safe and promising therapy option for compromised clavicle fractures in the middle and lateral third.Entities:
Keywords: clavicula; compromised fracture healing; regenerative medicine; shockwave therapy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35407594 PMCID: PMC8999686 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11071988
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Figure 1Pre-operative evaluation of the fracture site and determination of the direction of application (left). The shockwave therapy head is positioned on the clavicle region (right).
Patients’ demographics and fracture details. The p-value indicates statistical significance between the ESWT and Surgical groups.
| Parameter | ESWT ( | Surgery ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 44 ± 13 (15–75) | 43 ± 12 (21–62) | 0.750 |
|
| |||
| Female | 8 (29%) | 8 (38%) | 0.5474 |
| Male | 20 (71%) | 13 (62%) | |
|
| |||
| Conservative | 18 (64%) | 16 (76%) | 0.5327 |
| Surgical | 10 (36%) | 5 (24%) | |
|
| |||
| Medial | 16 (57%) | 19 (90%) | 0.0126 * |
| Lateral | 12 (43%) | 2 (10%) | |
|
| |||
| Atrophic | 15 (54%) | 7 (33%) | 0.2460 |
| Hypertrophic | 13 (46%) | 14 (67%) | |
|
| 279 ± 205 (51–905) | 232 ± 108 (66–541) | 0.3170 |
|
| 4 (1–2) | 2 (1–2) |
* indicates statistical significant more lateral fractures in the ESWT group compared to the surgical group.
Patient outcomes over time and statistical significance between the ESWT and Surgical groups are indicated by the p-value.
| Outcome | ESWT ( | Surgery ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Healed | 13 (46%) | 9 (43%) | >0.9999 |
| Not healed | 15 (64%) | 12 (57%) | |
|
| |||
| Healed | 21 (75%) | 15 (71%) | 0.7172 |
| Not healed | 7 (25%) | 3 (14%) | |
| Lost follow up | - | 3 (14%) | |
|
| |||
| Complications | 0 (0%) | 4 (19%) | 0.0282 * |
| No complications | 28 (100%) | 21 (81%) |
* indicates statistical significant more complications in the surgical group compared to the ESWT group.
Figure 2(A) Non-union of the right clavicle in a 51-year-old male. (B) Six months post-surgery, bony healing was achieved using standard-of-care treatment with non-union interfragmentary scar resection, autologous bone graft, and plating; (C) a 26-year-old male patient who received plating of a mid-third clavicle acute fracture showed a non-union associated with a hardware failure. The CT scan (insert) confirms the indirect signs of non-union (i.e., screw failure, implant loosening). The patient refused revision surgery and focused high-energy shockwaves were applied. Six months after treatment, bridging occurred (D), confirmed by another CT scan (insert).
Figure 3Peak positive pressure distribution: −6 dB and 5 MPa focal zones are delineated by solid and dashed lines.
Figure 4Peak tensile pressure distribution (A–C) with spatial units (mm) and waveform at the reference focal point (D), and the indicated position of maximum tensile stress at lung surface (E).