Abstract

BackgroundTraditional tension band wiring and plate fixation represent the commonest methods for treating olecranon fractures. However, there is no agreement on which method provides the best outcome. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the outcomes of tension band wiring (TBW) and plate fixation (PF) for treating displaced olecranon fractures. This is the first study to use propensity score matching analysis to compare treatment methods for olecranon fracture.MethodA total of 107 patients aged between 18 and 85 had acute isolated and displaced olecranon fractures. The patients were divided into either TBW (n = 49) or PF (n = 58) groups. To conduct propensity score matching for the treatment method (TBW versus PF), 58 patients were analyzed by logistic regression (29 patients in each group). Various demographic and treatment-related variables were examined and analyzed to determine their correlation.ResultsFunctional effects between two groups are similar (in terms of Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the patients’ range of elbow motion (ROM) and forearm rotation (RFR), the time return to work (RTW)). The total adverse events rate and metalwork removal events rate are higher in TBW than that in PF. After propensity score matching analysis, similar primary treatment efficacy (indicated by MEPS> 90) in 2 groups and more primary adverse events (indicated by metalwork removal) were perceived in TBW than that in PF. Logistic regression analysis revealed that fracture type was an independent factor that affected the efficacy of a treatment (regression coefficient = − 1.24 < 0, P = 0.03), indicating that fracture severity was inversely proportional to the efficacy of a treatment for olecranon fracture. Furthermore, logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the treatment method was an independent factor that affected metalwork removal of olecranon fracture (regression coefficient 2.38 > 0, OR = 10.77, P < 0.01), indicating that the risk of metalwork removal in the TBW Group was 10.77 times that in the PF Group.ConclusionWhen initially discussing the surgical approach with patients, physicians should fully weigh the possibility that TBW may lead to a second surgery due to the higher risk of internal fixation removal and that TBW won’t yield better functional outcomes than PF .

Highlights

  • Traditional tension band wiring and plate fixation represent the commonest methods for treating olecranon fractures

  • Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the treatment method was an independent factor that affected metalwork removal of olecranon fracture, indicating that the risk of metalwork removal in the tension band wiring (TBW) Group was 10.77 times that in the plate fixation (PF) Group

  • When initially discussing the surgical approach with patients, physicians should fully weigh the possibility that TBW may lead to a second surgery due to the higher risk of internal fixation removal and that TBW won’t yield better functional outcomes than PF

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Traditional tension band wiring and plate fixation represent the commonest methods for treating olecranon fractures. There is no agreement on which method provides the best outcome The aim of this retrospective study is to compare the outcomes of tension band wiring (TBW) and plate fixation (PF) for treating displaced olecranon fractures. This is the first study to use propensity score matching analysis to compare treatment methods for olecranon fracture. Despite advocates for alternative surgical techniques including intramedullary nailing and suture fixation, TBW fixation remains the standard management for simple isolated, displaced fractures of the olecranon (Mayo type 2A) [2]. PF can be used for any type of olecranon fracture but it is recommended for the following indications: comminuted fractures, Monteggia fracture dislocations, oblique fractures ( those distal to midpoint of the trochlear notch) and fractures that involve the coronoid process [4]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.