Effectiveness of locking versus dynamic compression plates for diaphyseal forearm fractures

Azboy İ., Demirtas A., Uçar B. Y., Bulut M., Alemdar C., Özkul E.

Orthopedics, vol.36, no.7, 2013 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 36 Issue: 7
  • Publication Date: 2013
  • Doi Number: 10.3928/01477447-20130624-23
  • Journal Name: Orthopedics
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Istanbul Medipol University Affiliated: No


This study compares the results of the locking compression plate (LCP) and the dynamic compression plate (DCP) in the treatment of diaphyseal forearm fractures in adults and defines the indications for the use of the LCP. Forty-two patients with diaphyseal forearm fractures were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 22 had been treated with the LCP (LCP group) and 20 had been treated with the DCP (DCP group). The AO/ASIF classification was used to classify the fractures. Patients were assessed using the Grace-Eversmann criteria and the Disabilities of the Arm and Shoulder and Hand questionnaire during the final follow-up. Mean follow-up was 21 months (range, 20-24 months) in the LCP group and 23 months (range, 19-26 months) in the DCP group. Union was achieved in all patients. Mean time to union was 15 weeks (range, 12-25 weeks) in the LCP group and 17 weeks (range, 13-24 weeks) in the DCP group. In each group, 1 patient experienced delayed union, which required no additional surgical intervention. No significant difference was found regarding the time to union between the groups (P>.05). No significant difference existed between the 2 groups in terms of Grace-Eversmann criteria and Disabilities of the Arm and Shoulder and Hand scores (both P>.05). The results of these different fixation methods for forearm fractures in adults are similar. As such, the correct selection and application of surgical technique is more important than the type of plate used.