Functional outcomes and adverse effects following three interventions for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

IntroductionThe efficacy of the most commonly used interventions for clavicle fractures remains controversial. These interventions are: open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF), non-surgical intervention (NSI), and use of an intramedullary nail (IMN). In adult patients with clavicle fractures, choosing which intervention might be best is challenging. Materials and methodsPubMed, Journals@Ovid Full Text, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase were performed to search English-language studies from the inception to February 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any of these three interventions were included. Patient and baseline characteristics, nonunion, major complications, Constant-Murley score (CMS), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (DASH) were extracted. Then, we evaluated the functional outcomes and adverse effects after use of these three interventions for the management of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. ResultsA Bayesian random-effects model was conducted, and nonunion and major complications were evaluated with: risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidential interval (CI); while CMS and DASH were evaluated with mean differences (MD) and the corresponding 95% confidential interval CI. The rank probability of each endpoint was assessed on the basis of the surface area under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). DiscussionORPF is most likely to be successful in achieving objective functional outcomes as captured by the CMS, and IMN demonstrates significant efficacy for subjective functional outcomes, as captured by DASH scores. Compared with the other interventions examined, IMN was associated with decreased risk for adverse effects. Levels of evidenceI; meta-analysis.