Outcomes of Treating Tibial Shaft Fractures Using Intramedullary Nailing (IMN) versus Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPPO).

Abstract

Background:Tibia shaft fractures are one of the most common long-bone fractures, second most common open sport-related injuries and they are estimated to occur in 4 percent of the senior population.Objective:Management of tibial fractures has been updating to achieve the best outcomes and avoid complications especially when talking about most common long bone fractures. Less invasive fixation techniques are the preferred ones to reduce surrounding soft tissue injury, improve healing process and decrease complications. Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) and Intramedullary nailing (IMN) are the least invasive and most popular modalities used nowadays. This study compares outcomes and complications of both modalities.Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study conducted in orthopedics department at KAUH-Jordan. Patients were followed up for a mean of 15.3 months. Only MIPPO and IMN were used, and exclusively tibial shaft fractures were included. Open fractures were classified according to the Gustilo-Anderson classification. Results:Ninety patients with a mean age of 36.9 years (range, 9-79) were observed. Fifty nine of them were treated with IMN; nine of them had complications. Thirty one patients were treated with MIPPO and only three developed complications. Three patients treated with IMN had non-union, whereas none of MIPPO patients developed non-union. Only perioperative blood loss was more when MIPPO was used taking into consideration the amount in the suction tube, amount of fluid irrigation and soaked gauze.Conclusion:In treating tibial shaft fractures, MIPPO appears to cause fewer complications and provides better healing environment therefore attributes to lower non-union rates than IMN. Larger sample size might be needed to provide better results.