Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Locking Plate with Cerclage Wiring Versus Hook Plate Fixation for Unstable Distal Clavicle Fractures: Is There Still a Role for Hook Plates?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Locking Plate with Cerclage Wiring Versus Hook Plate Fixation for Unstable Distal Clavicle Fractures: Is There Still a Role for Hook Plates?
Do you wish to request the book?
Locking Plate with Cerclage Wiring Versus Hook Plate Fixation for Unstable Distal Clavicle Fractures: Is There Still a Role for Hook Plates?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Locking Plate with Cerclage Wiring Versus Hook Plate Fixation for Unstable Distal Clavicle Fractures: Is There Still a Role for Hook Plates?
2025
Overview
Background and Objectives: Hook plate fixation has been widely used for unstable distal clavicle fractures, but concerns remain regarding implant-related complications and the need for secondary removal. Locking plate fixation with supplementary cerclage wiring has been proposed as an alternative that may provide stability while reducing complications. This study compared the clinical and radiologic outcomes of locking plate fixation with cerclage wiring versus hook plate fixation. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation for unstable distal clavicle fractures (Cho’s classification type II) between 2015 and 2024. Patients with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Two techniques were evaluated: locking plate with cerclage wiring (Group 1) and hook plate fixation (Group 2). Clinical outcomes, including complications, range of motion, and patient satisfaction, were compared at the final follow-up. Results: A total of 52 patients met the inclusion criteria: 27 in Group 1 and 25 in Group 2. The overall mean follow-up period was 13.17 ± 8.46 months. The distribution of fracture types was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.287). Complications were more frequent in Group 2 (40%), including postoperative stiffness requiring capsular release (70%), nonunion requiring revision (20%), and peri-implant fracture (10%). The overall union rate was 100% in Group 1 and 80% in Group 2. In contrast, Group 1 had only one complication (3.7%), a peri-implant fracture (p = 0.002). Shoulder range of motion at the final follow-up showed no significant difference between groups. Conclusions: Hook plate fixation was associated with a significantly higher complication rate compared with locking plate fixation with cerclage wiring. Locking plate fixation with supplementary cerclage wiring appears to be a better surgical option for unstable distal clavicle fractures.
Publisher
MDPI AG
