AzTrials
AzTrials

Clavicle FractureCOMPACTNCT05231343

Comparing Dual Mini-fragment Plating to Single Precontoured Plating of Acute Midshaft Clavicle Fractures Trial

A study testing Dual Mini-fragment Plating and Single Precontoured Plating in people with Clavicle Fracture, run by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre at 1 site in Canada.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The rate of surgical fixation of fractures of the collarbone (i.e., midshaft clavicle) has exponentially increased in recent years; however, the rate of repeat procedures for removal of these implants (i.e., plates) due to irritation remains high. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 65 years
Conditions the study is for
Clavicle Fracture
What is being tested?
Dual Mini-fragment Plating and Single Precontoured Plating
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
66 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
4 Apr 2022to Jan 2028
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 65 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Between 18 and 65 years of age
  • A completely displaced midshaft fracture of the clavicle (no cortical contact between the main proximal and distal fragments (AO/OTA 15.2A/B/C)
  • Fracture amenable to plate fixation with a minimum of three screws in each proximal and distal fragment

Who cannot join

  • Open fracture
  • Pathological fracture
  • Fracture seen > 28 days after injury
  • Associated neurovascular injury
  • Associated head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale < 12)
  • Concomitant ipsilateral upper extremity fracture
Show all 9Show fewer
  • Significant medical comorbidities (i.e., ASA grade IV and V)
  • Inability to comply with follow-up and
  • Lack of consent

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Katrine Milner, BSc contact

katrine.milner@sunnybrook.ca

Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre

    Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5

    Alicia Alvares, BSc, 416-480-4285, orthores@sunnybrook.ca

    Katrine Milner, BSc, katrine.milner@sunnybrook.ca

    Recruiting

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Dual Mini-Fragment Plating to Single Precontoured Plating of Acute Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: A Pilot Study

The rate of surgical fixation of fractures of the collarbone (i.e., midshaft clavicle) has exponentially increased in recent years; however, the rate of repeat procedures for removal of these implants (i.e., plates) due to irritation remains high. Despite technological advances in implant design, nearly one in four patients with a surgically fixed collarbone ultimately undergoes removal of their implant. More recently, there has been a growing body of literature demonstrating the effectiveness of using two smaller caliber plates, which have been found to have similar rates of implant removal. As such, the proposed randomized clinical trial seeks to be the first level I study to directly compare dual mini-fragment plating of acute displaced midshaft clavicle fractures to single precontoured plating. The investigators hypothesize that dual mini-fragment plating will result in lower rates of reoperation with similar rates of union and complication.

Read the detailed description

Midshaft clavicle fractures have traditionally been treated non-operatively with immobilization in a sling or a figure-of-eight bandage. Early studies reported a non-union rate of 1% and negligible functional consequence with conservative management. However, the inclusion of pediatric fractures and an absence of modern functional assessments in these studies resulted in an underestimation of non-union rates and overly optimistic clinical outcomes. More recent data has demonstrated a non-union rate of 15% with approximately 30% of patients dissatisfied with their outcome following non-operative treatment. As a result, there has been renewed interest in surgical fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. In fact, the rate of operative fixation has exponentially increased following the publication of a landmark randomized controlled trial by the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society (COTS) which was the first of many level I studies to demonstrate higher union rates, decreased rates of symptomatic malunion, earlier return to function, and improved patient-reported outcomes with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

Traditional plating techniques for open reduction and internal fixation of clavicle fractures involved the use of a single 3.5-mm plates placed superiorly or anteriorly. However, these plates are often very prominent under the skin causing irritation, and in many cases result in reoperation for hardware removal. The rate of reoperation for removal of symptomatic hardware has been reported to range from 8% to 66%. For this reason, there have been a number of different fixation strategies describes to minimize the need to return to the operating room for implant-related symptoms. These include intramedullary nailing and the use of anatomic precontoured clavicle plates positioned superiorly or anteroinferiorly. However, even with the use of precontoured plates, the reported hardware removal rate varies from 5% to 47%. This is likely due to the significant variation in clavicle anatomy (i.e., sigmoid curve, coronal bow and length) observed between individuals which precludes anatomic fitting of precontoured plates in all patients. In fact, Malhas and colleagues published a cadaveric study that found further contouring of precontoured plates was necessary in 73% of cases to optimize plate-bone fit.

More recently, a dual plate construct using two mini-fragment plates (i.e., 2.4-mm or 2.7-mm plates) placed orthogonally has been advocated as a means of decreasing the rate of reoperation for symptomatic hardware removal. In 2015, Prasarn et al. reported on a series of 17 patients undergoing clavicle fixation using a 2.7-mm plate positioned superiorly and a 2.4-mm plate positioned anteriorly and had no reoperations while noting a 100% union rate. The idea of dual plating is not new and is commonly used in the setting of clavicle fracture non-union fixation. Its efficacy has also been described in distal clavicle fractures. Dual plating may serve as the ideal low-profile implant option to help diminish the high rates of symptomatic implant removal observed with single plating. The benefits associated with a dual plate construct extend beyond a reduction in implant-related soft-tissue irritation. Intraoperatively, dual plating allows for more points of fixation, buttressing of anterior butterfly fragments, mini-fragment plates to be used as washers for multiple lag screws, and the use of either the superior or anterior plate as a reduction aid or clamp, while the second plate is applied. Based on existing biomechanical data in the literature, the ability of a dual plate construct to withstand multiplanar bending forces better than a single plate construct may also allow for early weight-bearing through the affected extremity. Despite the aforementioned benefits of dual plate fixation, there remains a lack of level I evidence for its use in the surgical management of acute midshaft clavicle fractures.

Being tested
Dual Mini-fragment Plating, Single Precontoured Plating
Keywords
Orthogonal plating, Hardware removal, Reoperation

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Dual Mini-fragment PlatingProcedure or surgery

    Patients randomized to dual mini-fragment plating will undergo clavicle fixation using any configuration of 2.0-mm, 2.4-mm and 2.7-mm limited contact dynamic compression (LC-DCP), locking compression (LCP) or reconstruction plates (i.e., 2.4-mm superior and 2.7-mm anteroinferior). One of the two plates used must be a LC-DCP or LCP plate. Surgeons will contour the mini-fragment plate intraoperatively to fit each patient's anatomy.

  • Single Precontoured PlatingProcedure or surgery

    Patients randomized to a single plate construct will undergo fixation using an anatomically precontoured (superior or anterior-inferior) clavicle plate.

Study groups in NCT05231343
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Dual mini-fragment platingExperimentalNot described
Receives: Procedure: Dual Mini-fragment Plating
Single precontoured platingActive comparatorNot described
Receives: Procedure: Single Precontoured Plating

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Removal of hardware at two years of follow-up

    The proportion of people that had their clavicle hardware removed by the two year follow-up.

    Measured: 24 months postop

Secondary outcomes (11)
  1. Radiographic union

    Complete cortical bridging between the proximal and distal fragments on both views.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  2. Reoperation causes other than hardware removal

    The proportion of people undergoing reoperation for reasons other than hardware removal.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  3. Adverse events/complications

    Any event that necessitates another operative procedure or additional medical treatment. Nonunion will be defined as a lack of radiographic healing with clinical evidence of pain and motion at the fracture site at one year. Complex regional pain syndrome will be diagnosed by the presence of dysesthesia and hyperesthesia extending into the hand of the operative limb, with associated vasomotor changes, skin atrophy and diffuse osteopenia.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  4. Operative duration

    Time between skin incision to skin closure

    Measured: Immediately after skin closure

  5. Pain as measured by the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)

    The outcome on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale at the time points listed below. The scale ranges from 0 to 10, with a lower score representing less pain and thus a better outcome.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  6. Functional outcome ASES

    Functional outcome as measured by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score. The score values range from 0 to 100, with a lower score representing greater pain and disability.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  7. Functional outcome DASH

    Functional outcome as measure by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. The score ranges from 0 to 100, with a lower score representing complete, unrestricted functioning of the upper extremities.

    Measured: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  8. Hardware related symptoms

    As measured by the Clavicle Hardware Irritation Patient Questionnaires (CHIP-Q). This is a qualitative questionnaire.

    Measured: 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 24 months postop

  9. Numbers of patients screened and eligible for the study within the recruitment period

    We are interested in understanding how many people are eligible for the study.

    Measured: Enrollment

  10. Numbers of patients who agree to participate

    We are interested in understanding how many people agree to participate in the study.

    Measured: Through study completion, an average 2 years

  11. Number of patients who have missed data points or time points

    We are interested in understanding how many people have missed data points or time points in the study.

    Measured: Through study completion, an average 2 years

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted9 Feb 2022
  2. Study start4 Apr 2022
  3. Primary completionJan 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completionJan 2028 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Participant
Enrolment
66 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05231343
Sponsor's protocol ID
COMPACT
Acronym
COMPACT
Status last verified
May 2023
First submitted
13 Jan 2022
Last updated
24 May 2023
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Dual Mini-fragment Plating and Single Precontoured Plating in people with Clavicle Fracture, run by Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre at 1 site in Canada.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 May 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Sara Aman, BSc (416-480-4285, orthores@sunnybrook.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Removal of hardware at two years of follow-up (time frame: 24 months postop). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 May 2023.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in