Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Outcome and complications of distal tibia fractures treated with intramedullary nails versus minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and the role of fibula fixation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Distal tibia fractures have been managed conservatively as well surgically. A large number of implants have been used for surgical management of these fractures. No treatment method or implant has been proven to be superior to others. In this prospective comparative study, the complications and outcome of distal tibia fractures managed with intramedullary nails and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis has been compared. Further, the role of fibula fixation in these fractures has been evaluated.

Materials and method

One hundred and fifty-four patients of distal tibia fractures with concomitant fibula fractures were randomized into 4 treatment groups based on predetermined inclusion criteria. Functional outcome in these groups was compared based on AOFAS score at 1 year. Intra-operative, post-operative parameters as well as radiological alignment, complications and the need for reoperation were also compared in these groups.

Result

The functional outcome in all four treatment groups was similar. The duration of surgery and radiation exposure was higher with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. There was no improvement in outcome with plating of fibula. However, fixation of fibula improved the rotational alignment in distal tibia fractures.

Conclusion

Although there is no difference in outcome of distal tibia fractures with either nailing or minimally invasive plating, nailing is recommended for closed displaced extraarticular fractures. Fixation of fibula should not be done routinely but should be reserved only for a few specific fracture patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Joveniaux P, Ohl X, Harisboure A, Berrichi A, Labatut L, Simon P et al (2010) Distal tibia fractures: management and complications of 101 cases. Int Orthop 34(4):583–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hooper GJ, Keddell RG, Penny ID (1991) Conservative management or closed nailing for tibial shaft fractures. A randomised prospective trial. J Bone Jt Surg Br 73(1):83–5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wani IH, Ul Gani N, Yaseen M, Bashir A, Bhat MS, Farooq M (2017) Operative management of distal tibial extra-articular fractures—intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 19(6):537–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Natarajan G, Vijayaraghavan P, Srinivasan D (2014) Comparison of clinical, radiological, and functional outcome of closed fracture of distal third tibia treated with nailing and plate osteosynthesis. Afr J Trauma 3(2):68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Polat A, Kose O, Canbora K, Yanık S, Guler F (2015) Intramedullary nailing versus minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for distal extra-articular tibial fractures: a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sci 20(4):695–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Guo JJ, Tang N, Yang HL, Tang TS (2010) A prospective, randomised trial comparing closed intramedullary nailing with percutaneous plating in the treatment of distal metaphyseal fractures of the tibia. J Bone Jt Surg Ser B 92(7):984–988

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bong MR, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ, Egol KA (2007) Intramedullary nailing of the lower extremity: biomechanics and biology. JAAOS J Am Acad Orthop Surg 15(2):97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Vallier HA, Le TT, Bedi A (2008) Radiographic and clinical comparisons of distal tibia shaft fractures (4 to 11 cm proximal to the plafond): plating versus intramedullary nailing. J Orthop Trauma 22(5):307–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Janssen KW, Biert J, Van Kampen A (2007) Treatment of distal tibial fractures: plate versus nail: a retrospective outcome analysis of matched pairs of patients. Int Orthop 31(5):709–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cheng W, Li Y, Manyi W (2011) Comparison study of two surgical options for distal tibia fracture—minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis versus open reduction and internal fixation. Int Orthop 35(5):737–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Teitz CC, Carter DR, Frankel VH (1980) Problems associated with tibial fractures with intact fibulae. J Bone Jt Surg Am 62(5):770–776

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sørensen KH (1969) Treatment of delayed union and non-union of the tibia by fibular resection. Acta Orthop 40(1):92–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Egol KA, Weisz R, Hiebert R, Tejwani NC, Koval KJ, Sanders RW (2006) Does fibular plating improve alignment after intramedullary nailing of distal metaphyseal tibia fractures? J Orthop Trauma 20(2):94–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Williams TM, Marsh JL, Nepola JV, DeCoster TA, Hurwitz SR, Bonar SB (1998) External fixation of tibial plafond fractures: Is routine plating of the fibula necessary? J Orthop Trauma 12(1):16–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS, Karam MD, Kellam JF (2018) Fracture and dislocation classification compendium—2018. J Orthop Trauma 32:S1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mao Z, Wang G, Zhang L, Zhang L, Chen S, Du H et al (2015) Intramedullary nailing versus plating for distal tibia fractures without articular involvement: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res [Internet]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0217-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lindvall E, Sanders R, Dipasquale T, Herscovici D, Haidukewych G, Sagi C (2009) Intramedullary nailing versus percutaneous locked plating of extra-articular proximal tibial fractures: comparison of 56 cases. J Orthop Trauma 23(7):485–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Li Y, Jiang X, Guo Q, Zhu L, Ye T, Chen A (2014) Treatment of distal tibial shaft fractures by three different surgical methods: a randomized, prospective study. Int Orthop 38(6):1261–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Barcak E, Collinge CA (2016) Metaphyseal distal tibia fractures: a cohort, single-surgeon study comparing outcomes of patients treated with minimally invasive plating versus intramedullary nailing. J Orthop Trauma 30(5):e169–e174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Berlusconi M, Busnelli L, Chiodini F, Portinaro N (2014) To fix or not to fix? The role of fibular fixation in distal shaft fractures of the leg. Injury [Internet] 45(2):408–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2013.09.017

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Varsalona R, Liu GT (2006) Distal tibial metaphyseal fractures: the role of fibular fixation. Strateg Trauma Limb Reconstr 1(1):42–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mioc ML, Prejbeanu R, Deleanu B, Anglitoiu B, Haragus H, Niculescu M (2018) Extra-articular distal tibia fractures—controversies regarding treatment options. A single-centre prospective comparative study. Int Orthop 42(4):915–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kuhn S, Greenfield J, Arand C, Jarmolaew A, Appelmann P, Mehler D et al (2015) Treatment of distal intraarticular tibial fractures: a biomechanical evaluation of intramedullary nailing versus angle-stable plate osteosynthesis. Injury 46:S99–S103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hoegel FW, Hoffmann S, Weninger P, Bühren V, Augat P (2012) Biomechanical comparison of locked plate osteosynthesis, reamed and unreamed nailing in conventional interlocking technique, and unreamed angle stable nailing in distal tibia fractures. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 73(4):933–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Taylor BC, Hartley BR, Formaini N, Bramwell TJ (2015) Necessity for fibular fixation associated with distal tibia fractures. Injury [Internet] 46(12):2438–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2015.09.035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rouhani A, Elmi A, Akbari Aghdam H, Panahi F, Dokht GY (2012) The role of fibular fixation in the treatment of tibia diaphysis distal third fractures. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(8):868–872

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Prasad M, Yadav S, Sud A, Arora NC, Kumar N, Singh S (2013) Assessment of the role of fibular fixation in distal-third tibia-fibula fractures and its significance in decreasing malrotation and malalignment. Injury 44(12):1885–1891

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ankur Kariya.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Ankur Kariya, Pramod Jain, Kisan Patond and Anuj Mundra declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file 1 (XLSX 25 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kariya, A., Jain, P., Patond, K. et al. Outcome and complications of distal tibia fractures treated with intramedullary nails versus minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and the role of fibula fixation. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 30, 1487–1498 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-020-02726-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-020-02726-y

Navigation