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

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.