Management of Extra-articular Fractures of the Distal Tibia: Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation

The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (Impact Factor: 2.53). 11/2012; 20(11):675-83. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-20-11-675
Source: PubMed


Intramedullary nailing and plate fixation represent two viable approaches to internal fixation of extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia. Although both techniques have demonstrated success in maintaining reduction and promoting stable union, they possess distinct advantages and disadvantages that require careful consideration during surgical planning. Differences in soft-tissue health and construct stability must be considered when choosing between intramedullary nailing and plating of the distal tibia. Recent advances in intramedullary nail design and plate-and-screw fixation systems have further increased the options for management of these fractures. Current evidence supports careful consideration of the risk of soft-tissue complications, residual knee pain, and fracture malalignment in the context of patient and injury characteristics in the selection of the optimal method of fixation.

  • Source
    • "To date, no consensus or clinical guidelines for indications have been developed for intramedullary (IM) nailing of distal tibia fractures with associated fibular fracture. Currently, there is a wide assortment of accepted treatment options for this injury, including IM nailing alone, plating of the tibia alone, and the addition of operative stabilisation of the fibula with either tibial nailing or plating [1] [2]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Intramedullary (IM) nailing is a well-accepted treatment for distal third tibia fractures in combination with injury to the fibula. However, the indications for operative stabilisation of the fibula remain controversial. Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review on a consecutive series of patients who underwent intramedullary nailing of a non-comminuted distal third tibia fracture with or without fibular fixation at a Level I urban trauma centre. A review of surgical records identified 120 patients who initially were included in this study, while a total of 98 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. Results: Our results found no difference in the mean value of coronal and sagittal plane alignment in both the immediate post-operative and follow-up time periods. We also saw no statistically significant difference when comparing malalignment between patients treated with or without fibula fixation. There were no deep infections between the two groups. No significant differences were seen between the fibular fixation group and the non-fixation group. Distal screw removal due to prominence or pain was the most common reason for future surgery in both groups. Conclusion: These findings suggest that the addition of fibular fixation does not affect whether or not alignment is maintained in either the immediate post-operative or short-term follow-up period.
    Preview · Article · Oct 2015 · Injury
  • Source
    • "The union rate in these fractures is still reported as 2.4% and the malunion rate as 14.3% independent of the treatment approach [18]. The current knowledge indicates that is essential to consider the risk of soft-tissue complications and fracture malalignment when selecting the method of fixation [18,19]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The management of displaced distal tibial fractures is still controversial. The different internal fixation techniques are often burdened by relatively high complication rates. Minimally invasive techniques with ring fixators have been introduced as an alternative allowing immediate reduction and stabilization, avoiding a staged protocol. The aim of this prospective study was to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcome the Ilizarov technique in patients with distal metaphyseal tibial fractures, with or without intra-articular involvement. Methods Thirty-nine consecutive patients with isolated fractures treated with the Ilizarov technique were followed prospectively for one year. Depending on the type of fracture, 4 or 5 rings were used, in some cases with additional foot extension. Unrestricted weight-bearing was allowed in all cases. Pre- and post-operatively conventional radiographs, post-operative pain assessment and complications were evaluated. The function was evaluated clinically and with self-appraisal protocols: EQ-5D, NHP and FAOS. Results No patient developed compartment syndrome or deep venous thrombosis. Pin infections were frequent, but they were mostly superficial and were treated with antibiotics and/or the removal of isolated pins. Two patients required debridement. One of them had a deep infection and developed a residual deformity which was corrected and healed after re-operation. Another patient had a severe residual deformity. The fixator was removed after a median period of 16 weeks (range 11–30). The radiological results were poor in 5 patients but the overall self-appraisal showed satisfactory results in 36 patients. Conclusions The Ilizarov method allowed early definitive treatment with a low complication rate and a good clinical outcome.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2013 · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Of the biological reconstruction methods for malignant bone and soft tissue tumors, reconstruction with liquid nitrogen has the advantage of maintaining continuity on the distal side of the tumor bone site (pedicle freezing procedure; PFP). This method is expected to result in early blood flow recovery, with early union and low complication rate. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of the PFP and free freezing procedure (FFP) in the lower extremities. The study included 20 patients (12 men and 8 women) with frozen autografts (FFP, 13 cases; PFP, 7 cases). The mean age of the subjects was 36.3 years (range 11-79 years), and the mean follow-up period was 56.4 months (range 12-142 months). Final bone union occurred in 11 patients in the FFP group (84.6 %) and in 7 patients in the PFP group (100 %). The mean union period in patients who did not need additional surgery was 9.8 months (range 4-21 months) in the FFP group and 4.8 months (range 2-7 months) in the PFP group. Postoperative complications occurred in 8 cases: infection in 3 cases, fracture in 3 cases, and joint destruction in 2 cases. Six FFP patients, and 2 PFP patients (two cases of fracture), developed postoperative complications. The union period was shorter and the rate of postoperative complications was lower with the PFP than with the FFP. We considered that early blood flow recovery might have led to the above results in the PFP.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2013 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
Show more