The efficacy of suprapatellar, parapatellar and infrapatellar intramedullary nailing in the treatment of tibial fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Tibial fractures are common and challenging orthopedic injuries that are commonly treated with intramedullary nailing techniques via suprapatellar (SP), parapatellar (PP), and infrapatellar (IP) approaches. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive comparative analysis of the efficacy of different treatment approaches based on clinical outcomes. We conducted a detailed search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science for clinical studies comparing suprapatellar, parapatellar, and infrapatellar approaches in intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials and retrospective cohort studies involving patients aged 18 and older, comparing outcomes of these surgical techniques. Exclusion criteria included studies with insufficient data, non-English publications, and those focusing on non-tibial fractures. A total of 15 studies involving 1396 patients were included in meta-analysis. Pooled results indicated that, compared to IP nailing, the SP approach significantly reduced fluoroscopy time (MD = -35.63, 95% CI -39.37 to -31.89, p < 0.001), operative time (MD = -10.72, 95% CI -17.30 to -4.15, p = 0.001), pain scores (SMD = -1.49, 95% CI -2.36 to -0.62, p < 0.001), and improved Lysholm scores (MD = 5.74, 95% CI 3.29 to 8.19, p < 0.001) and malalignment rate (RR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.68, p = 0.008). Quality of life assessments also indicated higher physical component scores for the SP group (MD = 6.68, 95% CI 5.19 to 8.17, p < 0.001). The SP approach provides significant intraoperative and postoperative benefits, reducing surgery time and improving patient outcomes in pain management and knee joint function. These findings support the SP approach as a preferred option for surgical treatment of tibial fractures.