Search

Introduction: Definitive treatment of distal extra-articular fractures of the tibia is challenging and both minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are considered to be feasible surgical modalities with their own implant-specific merits and demerits. This retrospective study was designed to compare MIPO versus IMN in terms of fracture healing, complications, functional and radiological outcomes and to assess the efficacy of intra-operative alignment control to reduce the rate of malalignment after definitive fixation of distal extra-articular fractures of the tibia. Materials and methods: All consecutive adult patients with extra-articular distal meta- or diaphyseal tibia fractures that were treated between January 2012 and September 2019 either with MIPO or IMN were included. Outcome measures included fracture healing, complications (infection, malalignment, subsequent surgeries), functional and radiological outcomes. Intra-operative alignment control encompassed bilateral draping of the lower extremities. Results: A total of 135 patients were included out of which 72 patients (53%) were treated with MIPO and 63 patients (47%) underwent IMN. There was a significantly higher incidence of non-union for fractures treated with IMN (13 (22%) vs. 4 (6%), p = 0.04). There was no significant difference between both groups in terms of rotational malalignment (3% vs. 10%) and angular malalignment (4% vs. 5%). A significantly higher rate of infection was found after MIPO after correction of significant differences in baseline characteristics. No differences were found in subsequent surgeries or functional outcomes. Conclusion: Both MIPO and IMN are reliable surgical techniques. IMN is associated with higher rates of non-union, whereas MIPO results in a higher risk for infection. The incidence of malalignment was surprisingly low endorsing the utility of the intra-operative alignment control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]