Reconstruction plates for stabilization of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: Differences between nonlocked and locked plates in two different positions

SummaryReconstruction plates permit contouring to the irregular anatomic shape of the clavicle. This study evaluated the biomechanical stability of locking and nonlocking clavicle reconstruction plates for treating midshaft, transverse fractures, comparing anterior-inferior to superior plate position. Twenty-four synthetic clavicles with mid-shaft fractures were repaired with either a locking or nonlocking clavicle reconstruction plate in either the anterior-inferior or superior plate position (n = 6/group). Repaired constructs were tested in axial compression, axial torsion, and cantilever bending failure. In compression, anterior-inferior plates were significantly stiffer than superior plates and locked plates stiffer than nonlocked. In torsion, anterior-inferior plates were stiffer, with a significant interaction term that favored anterior-inferior locked and superior nonlocked plates. In cantilever bending, superior plates had a significantly higher bending failure load and stiffness. Anterior-inferior plates failed at a significantly lower load (∼40 N or ∼4 kg), which could potentially occur in the postoperative period.