Intramedullary Fixation Group Research Articles

Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study of Nonoperative Versus Operative Treatment for High-Energy Midshaft Clavicle Fractures.

Evaluate if nonoperative or operative treatment of displaced clavicle fractures delivers reduced rates of nonunion and improved Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. Multicenter, prospective, observational. Seven Level 1 Trauma Centers in the United States. Adults with closed, displaced (100% displacement/shortened >1.5 cm) midshaft clavicle fractures (Orthopaedic Trauma Association 15.2) were treated nonoperatively, with plates and screw fixation, or with intramedullary fixation from 2003 to 2018. DASH scores (2, 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months), reoperation, and nonunion were compared between the nonoperative, plate fixation, and intramedullary fixation groups. Four hundred twelve patients were enrolled, with 203 undergoing plate fixation, 26 receiving intramedullary fixation, and 183 treated nonoperatively. The average age of the nonoperative group was 40.1 (range 18-79) years versus 35.8 (range 18-74) in the plate group and 39.3 (range 19-56) in the intramedullary fixation group (P = 0.06). One hundred forty (76.5%) patients in the nonoperative group were male compared with 154 (75.9%) in the plate group and 18 (69.2%) in the intramedullary fixation group (P = 0.69). All groups showed similar DASH scores at 2 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months (P > 0.05). Plate fixation demonstrated better DASH scores (median = 20.8) than nonoperative (median = 28.3) at 6 weeks (P = 0.04). Intramedullary fixation had poorer DASH scores at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months than plate fixation and worse DASH scores than nonoperative at 6 months (P < 0.05). The nonunion rate for nonoperative treatment (14.6%) was significantly higher than the plate group (0%) (P < 0.001). Operative treatment of displaced clavicle fractures provided lower rates of nonunion than nonoperative treatment. Except at 6 weeks, no difference was observed in DASH scores between plate fixation and nonoperative treatment. Intramedullary fixation resulted in worse DASH scores than plate fixation at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months and worse DASH scores than nonoperative at 6 months. Implant removal was the leading reason for reoperation in the plate and intramedullary fixation groups, whereas surgery for nonunion was the primary reason for surgery in the nonoperative group. Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison Between Intramedullary Nail and Percutaneous Pin Fixation in Proximal Phalanx Fractures.

Percutaneous pinning has been the predominant technique for fixation of proximal phalanx fractures, but stiffness is a reported complication. The introduction of intramedullary (IM) nail fixation of proximal phalanx fractures provides a stronger biomechanical fixation for amenable fracture patterns with the added benefit of not tethering the soft tissue. The goal of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of IM nail and percutaneous pin fixation in isolated proximal phalanx fractures. A retrospective review was performed at our institution between the years 2018 and 2022 for patients treated for proximal phalanx fractures. Patients that underwent fixation with IM nails or percutaneous fixation for isolated extraarticular proximal phalanx fractures were included. Patients were excluded if they had concomitant hand fractures, tendon injury, or intraarticular extension. A total of 50 patients were included in this study. Twenty-eight patients received percutaneous pin fixation, and 22 patients underwent IM nail or screw fixation. There was no significant difference in injury patterns or demographics between these two groups. Patients that underwent IM nail fixation had a significantly quicker return to active motion, shorter duration of orthosis treatment, and fewer occupational therapy visits. In addition, patients in the IM fixation group had significantly improved range of motion (ROM) at 6 weeks postoperatively. This study demonstrates that patients receiving percutaneous pin or IM nail fixation have equivocal union and complication rates. The IM nail fixation group was able to have quicker return to mobilization, fewer required occupational therapy visits, and improved early ROM.

Alternative Surgical Treatment Method for 5th Metacarpal Neck Fractures: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Intramedullary and Transverse K-Wire Fixations with Additional Antirotational K-Wire.

The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with intramedullary and transverse K-wire fixations of 5th metacarpal neck fractures. Patients who were operated for 5th metacarpal neck fractures between 2019 and 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Regarding the surgical treatment methods, patients were assessed by dividing them into two groups. The first group comprised patients who underwent treatment with an intramedullary K-wire. The second group comprises patients who underwent transverse K-wire fixation. The average quick DASH score of all patients was 5.6±4.7 in the intramedullary K-wire fixation group and 5.9±5.1 in the transverse K-wire fixation group. An average 5th finger metacarpophalangeal joint extension limitation was 6.2±5.7° in the intramedullary fixation group and 6.1±5.8° in the transverse K-wire group. The mean radiological union time was 4.9±0.7 weeks in the intramedullary fixation group and 5.1±0.7 weeks in the transverse K-wire group. No statistically significant difference was found between the quick DASH scores and degrees of the MCP joint extension limitation ( p=0.785). Intramedullary fixation and transverse K-wire fixations are effective surgical treatment methods for metacarpal neck fractures. It has been reported that the intramedullary fixation method in metacarpal bone fractures is more effective than the fixation methods with cross and transverse K-wire. But our results revealed no difference in clinical outcomes between the two surgical fixation methods. We observed no statistically significant difference between the two fixation techniques with regard to union, clinical outcomes, or complications. intramedullary fixation; metacarpal neck fracture; transverse K-wire fixation.

Is intramedullary pinning for isolated ulnar shaft fractures a surgical alternative to plate fixation?

IntroductionUnstable isolated ulnar shaft fractures are rare injuries that need to be surgically treated. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional and radiographic outcomes of two types of surgeries: closed reduction and intramedullary fixation (IMF) by pinning and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). HypothesisOur hypothesis was that IMF obtained similar outcomes to ORIF. Materials and methodsAll patients treated for an isolated distal or middle third ulnar shaft fracture between 2016 and 2019 were enrolled into two groups: ORIF and IMF. The technique performed depended on the surgeon's preference and not the type of fracture or patient. Demographic and clinical data (QuickDASH) and complications were retrospectively collected. X-rays were also examined to classify the fracture, assess postoperative reduction quality, and determine the amount of shortening and angulation. ResultsA total of 81 patients with a mean age of 34 years were divided into two groups: 34 in ORIF and 47 in IMF. The two groups had similar demographics, mechanisms of injury, and preoperative fracture characteristics. The only difference was smoking (p<0.001). Despite a greater mean ulnar shortening of 0.4 mm in the IMF group (p=0.048), there were no significant differences regarding the functional score (QuickDASH) and rate of pseudarthrosis. However, the operative time (p<0.001) was shorter in the IMF group. DiscussionIn the treatment of unstable isolated ulnar shaft fractures, IMF and ORIF had similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in terms of bone healing. The mean ulnar shortening reported in the IMF group was small and was not at risk of developing posttraumatic osteoarthritis. ConclusionIMF is a feasible therapeutic alternative to ORIF for isolated fractures of the distal two-thirds of the ulnar shaft. Further studies with a higher level of evidence need to be conducted to confirm the equivalence of these two fixation techniques. Level of evidenceIV, retrospective study.

Clinical Outcomes of Intramedullary and Extramedullary Fixation in Unstable Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

The best method for repairing intertrochanteric fractures is still controversial. The fixation methods include extramedullary (EM) and intramedullary (IM). Studies that compare IM and EM fixations for unstable hip fractures are rare. In this study, our goal was to compare the efficacy of EM and IM fixation in treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures. A total of 113 patients with unstable intertrochanteric were randomized in this cohort study between March 2016 and June 2018 in trauma center of Kashani and Alzahra Hospitals, Isfahan, Iran. The patients were followed for a period of 12 months with sequential clinical and imaging evaluations. Baseline data were recorded at the time of injury. Radiographs were evaluated immediately post-operatively and at the scheduled follow-up intervals. A total of 20 of patients were excluded during the study and finally 93 patients (43 males and 50 females) with mean age of 62.74±16.4 completed the follow-up sessions. Mann-Whitney test indicated a significant difference in tip-apex distance between the two groups. While the two groups were homogeneous in the baseline LEM score, it was not significantly different between two groups after 1 and 3 months of surgery as well. However, the LEM score was significantly higher in IM group after 6 and 12 months of surgery. According to our findings, IM nails (such as the cephalomedullary nail) afforded more advantages over EM devices (such as the DHS and DCS) in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures. Our results indicated that the final LEM scores as well as the time to union were better in IM fixation group.

A comparison of fixation methods in adolescent patients with diaphyseal forearm fractures

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to compare both bone diaphyseal forearm fractures in adolescent patients treated with plate fixation to patients treated with intramedullary fixation to identify differences in complications and outcomes. Materials & methodsA retrospective study was performed on all adolescent patients with age between 10 and16 year and treated with intramedullary fixation or plate fixation for a diaphyseal both bone forearm fracture between 2005 and 2014. Demographic information and clinical data was collected. Radiographs were reviewed to evaluate post-operative radial bow magnitude and location, time to union, and residual angulation. Complications were graded using the modified Clavien-Dindo Classification system. ResultsA total of 102 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 32 were treated with plate fixation and 70 with intramedullary fixation. The intramedullary nail group had 55% of complications classified as major. There were no major complications in the plate fixation group (P = 0.1). The radial bow was significantly more distal and smaller in magnitude in the intramedullary fixation group (P < 0.01). Of the patients who underwent intramedullary fixation, 76% required an open reduction of at least one forearm bone. There was increased time to radiographic union in patients treated with intramedullary fixation when compared to those treated with plates, 68 days versus 58 days (P = 0.03). A second operation was necessary for 91% of patients treated with intramedullary fixation compared to only 3% of patients treated with a plate (P < 0.01). ConclusionDiaphyseal forearm fractures in adolescent patients remain challenging injuries to treat. Forearm bony anatomy is not completely restored with intramedullary fixation. Results suggested an association towards increased complication rates and complication severity with intramedullary fixation. Level of evidenceLevel 3 retrospective comparative study

Plating versus intramedullary fixation for mid-shaft clavicle fractures: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Background. Plate fixation and intramedullary fixation are the most commonly used surgical treatment options for mid-shaft clavicle fractures; the latter method has demonstrated better performance in some studies.Objectives. Our aim was to critically review and summarize the literature comparing the outcomes of mid-shaft clavicle fracture treatment with plate fixation or intramedullary fixation to identify the better approach.Search Methods. Potential academic articles were identified from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966-2015.5), PubMed (1966-2015.5), EMBASE (1980-2015.5) and ScienceDirect (1966-2015.5). Gray studies were identified from the references of the included literature.Selection Criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing plate fixation and intramedullary fixation for mid-shaft clavicle fracture were included.Data Collection and Analysis. Two reviewers performed independent data abstraction. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. A fixed- or random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis.Results. Six RCTs and nine non-RCTs were retrieved, including 513 patients in the intramedullary fixation group and 521 patients in the plating group. No significant differences in terms of the union rate and shoulder function were found between the groups. Patients in the intramedullary fixation group had a shorter operative time, less blood loss, smaller wound size, and shorter union time than those in the plating group. With respect to complications, significant differences were identified for all complications and major complications (wound infection, nonunion, implant failures, transient brachial plexopathy, and pain after 6 months). Similar secondary complications (symptomatic hardware, hardware irritation, prominence, numbness, hypertrophic callus) were observed in both groups.Conclusions. Intramedullary fixation may be superior to plate fixation in the treatment of mid-shaft clavicle fractures, with similar performance in terms of the union rate and shoulder function, better operative parameters and fewer complications.

Complications associated with operative fixation of acute midshaft clavicle fractures

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to review the complication rate and profile associated with surgical fixation of acute midshaft clavicle fracture in a large cohort of patients treated in a level I trauma centre. Patients and methodsWe identified all patients who underwent surgical treatment of acute midshaft clavicle fracture between 2002 and 2010. The study group consisted of 138 fractures (134 patients) and included 107 men (78%) and 31 women (22%); the median age of 35 years (interquartile range (IQR) 24–45). The most common mechanism of injury was a road traffic accident (78%). Sixty percent (n=83) had an injury severity score of ≥15 indicating major trauma. The most common fracture type (75%) was simple or wedge comminuted (2B1) according to the Edinburgh classification. The median interval between the injury and operation was 3 days (IQR 1–6). Plate fixation was performed in 110 fractures (80%) and intramedullary fixation was performed in 28 fractures (20%). There were 85 men and 25 women in the plate fixation group with median age of 35 years (IQR 25–45) There were 22 men and six women in the intramedullary fixation group with median age of 31 years (IQR 24–42 years). Statistical analysis was performed using independent sample t test, Mann Whitney test, and Chi square test. Significant P-value was <0.05. ResultsThe overall incidence of complication was 14.5% (n=20). The overall nonunion rate was 6%. Postoperative wound infection occurred in 3.6% of cases. The incidence of complication associated with plate fixation was 10% (11 of 110 cases) compared to 32% associated with intramedullary fixation (nine of 28 cases; P=0.003). Thirty-five percent of complications were related to inadequate surgical technique and were potentially avoidable. Symptomatic hardware requiring removal occurred in 23% (n=31) of patients. Symptomatic metalware was more frequent after plate fixation compared to intramedullary fixation (26% vs 7%, P=0.03). ConclusionsIntramedullary fixation of midshaft clavicle fracture is associated with a higher incidence of complications. Plate fixation is associated with a higher rate of symptomatic metalware requiring removal compared to intramedullary fixation. Approximately one in three complications may be avoided by attention to adequate surgical technique.

Surgical interventions for treating acute fractures or non-union of the middle third of the clavicle.

This review covers two conditions: acute clavicle fractures and non-union resulting from failed fracture healing. Clavicle (collarbone) fractures account for around 4% of all fractures. While treatment for these fractures is usually non-surgical, some types of clavicular fractures, as well as non-union of the middle third of the clavicle, are often treated surgically. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2009. To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of different methods of surgical treatment for acute fracture or non-union of the middle third of the clavicle. We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (27 June 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (1966 to June week 3 2014), EMBASE (1988 to 2014 week 25), LILACS (1982 to 27 June 2014), trial registries and reference lists of articles. We applied no language or publication restrictions. We considered randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating any surgical intervention for treating people with fractures or non-union of the middle third of the clavicle. The primary outcomes were shoulder function or disability, pain and treatment failure (measured by the number of participants who had undergone or were being considered for a non-routine secondary surgical intervention for symptomatic non-union, malunion or other complications). Two review authors selected eligible trials, independently assessed risk of bias and cross-checked data. Where appropriate, we pooled results of comparable trials. We included seven trials in this review with 398 participants. Four trials were new in this update.The four new trials (160 participants) compared intramedullary fixation with open reduction and internal fixation with plate for treating acute middle third clavicle fractures in adults. Low quality evidence from the four trials indicated that intramedullary fixation did not result in a clinically important improvement in upper arm function (despite a statistically significant difference in its favour: standardised mean difference 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.81; 120 participants, three trials) at long term follow-up of six months or more. Very low quality evidence indicated little difference between intramedullary fixation and plate fixation in pain (one trial), treatment failure resulting in non-routine surgery (2/68 with intramedullary fixation vs. 3/65 with plate fixation; risk ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.97, four trials) or time to clinical fracture consolidation (three trials). There was very low quality evidence of a lower incidence of participants with adverse events (mainly infection, poor cosmetic result and symptomatic hardware) in the intramedullary fixation group (18/68 with intramedullary fixation vs. 27/65 with plate fixation; RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.03) but the CI of the pooled results also included the small possibility of a lower incidence in the plate fixation group. None of the four trials reported on quality of life or return to previous activities. Evidence is pending from two ongoing trials, with planned recruitment of 245 participants, testing this comparison.There was low or very low quality evidence from three small trials, each testing a different comparison. The three trials had design features that carried a high risk of bias, potentially limiting the reliability of their findings. Low-contact dynamic compression plates appeared to be associated with significantly better upper-limb function throughout the year following surgery, earlier fracture union and return to work, and a reduced incidence of implant-associated symptoms when compared with a standard dynamic compression plate in 36 adults with symptomatic non-union of the middle third of the clavicle. One quasi-randomised trial (69 participants) compared Knowles pin versus a plate for treating middle third clavicle fractures or non-union. Knowles pins appeared to be associated with lower pain levels and use of postoperative analgesics and a reduced incidence of implant-associated symptoms. One study (133 participants) found that a three-dimensional technique for fixation with a reconstruction plate was associated with a significantly lower incidence of symptomatic delayed union than a standard superior position surgical approach. Evidence is pending from two ongoing trials, with planned recruitment of 130 participants, comparing anterior versus superior plates for acute fractures. There is very limited and low quality evidence available from randomised controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of different methods of surgical fixation of fractures and non-union of the middle third of the clavicle. The evidence from four ongoing trials is likely to inform practice for the comparisons of intramedullary versus plate fixation and anterior versus superior plates for acute fractures in a future update. Further randomised trials are warranted, but in order to optimise research effort, these should be preceded by research that aims to identify priority questions.

A Comparison of Intramedullary and Extramedullary Fixations for the Treatment of Reverse Oblique or Transverse Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures

Purpose: This study was designed to compare the clinical and radiological results of intramedullary fixation to those of extramedullary fixation in patients with reverse oblique or transverse intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 39 cases of reverse oblique or transverse intertrochanteric femoral fractures between September 2001 and December 2010. There were 20 cases treated with intramedullary fixation (Group I) and 19 cases treated with extramedullary fixation (Group II). The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, amount of blood transfused, hospital day, and time to bone union were compared between the two groups. Radiologically, the position and sliding length of the lag screw or blade, change of femoral neck-shaft angle, and medialization of distal fragment were compared. Also, complications were assessed. Results: The mean operative time was 87.8 minutes with Group I and 153.8 minutes with Group II. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 375.0 ml with Group I and 1,015.8 ml with Group II. The mean amount of transfusion was 555.5 ml with Group I and 801.6 ml with Group II. The mean time to bone union was 12.1 weeks with Group I and 18.1 weeks with Group II. There were no statistical differences in other parameters between the two groups. Conclusion: The intramedullary fixation group revealed better results in the aspects of invasiveness and time to bone union in comparison with the extramedullary fixation group for the treatment of reverse oblique or transverse intertrochanteric femoral fractures.

Endoprostheses Last Longer Than Intramedullary Devices in Proximal Femur Metastases

The proximal femur is the most common site of surgery for bone metastases, and stabilization may be achieved through intramedullary fixation (IMN) or endoprosthetic reconstruction (EPR). Intramedullary devices are less expensive, less invasive, and may yield improved function over endoprostheses. However, it is unclear which, if either, has any advantages. We determined whether function, complications, and survivorship differed between the two approaches. We retrospectively reviewed 158 patients with 159 proximal femur metastatic lesions treated with surgical stabilization. Forty-six were stabilized with IMN and 113 were treated with EPR. The minimum followup was 0.25 months (mean, 16 months; median, 17 months; range, 0.25-86 months). The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was 24 of 30 (80%) after IMN and 21 of 30 (70%) after EPR. There were 12 complications (26%) in the IMN group, including 10 nonunions, six of which went on to mechanical failure. There were complications in 20 of 113 (18%) of the EPR group, which consisted of 10 dislocations (9%) and 10 infections (9%). There were no mechanical failures with EPR. Both implants remained functional for the limited lifespan of these patients in each group at all time intervals. EPRs were associated with increased implant longevity compared with IMNs (100% versus 85% 5-year survival, respectively) and a decreased rate of mechanical failure (0% versus 11%, respectively) when compared with the intramedullary devices. Patients with metastatic disease to the proximal femur may live for long periods of time, and these patients may undergo stabilization with either IMN or EPR with comparable functional scores and the implant survivorship exceeding patient survivorship at all time intervals. Endoprostheses demonstrate a lower mechanical failure rate and a higher rate of implant survivorship without mechanical failure than IMN devices. Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Journal Scan: Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics

Here is my view of the top-10 most potentially influential papers from the Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics from 2007. Included are the papers that were thought to provide the most useful examinations of treatments and outcomes.

Comparaison vis-plaque dynamique et ostéosynthèse intra-médullaire antérograde dans les fractures pertrochantériennes: Une étude prospective randomisée

Purpose of the study The objective of this study was to compare the dynamic hip screw (Synthes ®) and intramedullary fixation (Targon PF, Aesculap ®) for the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures in terms of stability, complications and cost effectiveness. Material and methods This prospective randomized study included 60 patients hospitalized in an emergency setting for pertrochanteric fractures between December 2003 and June 2004. All surgeons in our unit participated in the study. Two fixation systems were used: the Targon proximal femoral nail (Aesculap ®) and the screw-plate dynamic hip screw (Synthes ®). We noted: patient status (ASA classification), operative data (type of implant, duration), postoperative data (blood loss, radiographic findings, early complications), and outcome (Harris score, time to walking, mortality). All patients were assessed three months after surgery. The series included 60 patients, 14 men (23%) and 46 women (77%). The Targon PF nail was used for 34 patients and the DHS for 26. In the intramedullary fixation group mean age was 81 years (SD = 12.8, range 23-96); it was 82 years (SD 9.8, range 47-97) in the screw-plate group. The AO classification was: intramedullary fixation 31A1 (n = 11), 31A2 (n = 20), 31A3 (n = 3); screw-plate 31A1 (n = 14), 31A2 (n = 11), 31A3 (n = 1). Thirty-one fractures were stable, 29 unstable. Unstable fractures were treated with the Targon PF nail (n = 18) and the DHS screw-plate (n = 11). Stable fractures were treated with the Targon PF nail (n = 15) and the DHS screw-plate (n = 15). Results Mean operative time was 35 minutes for intramedullary nailing and 42 mintues for screw-plate fixation. Mean blood loss was 410 ml for intramedullary nailing and 325 ml for screw-plate fixation (p = 0.07). Mean hospital stay was the same (11 days) in both groups. At three months, mechanical complications involved migration of the cervical screw outside the femoral head for three Targon PF fixations and for two DHS fixations. Screw migration was favored by fracture instability and presence of osteoporosis. There were two deaths in the intramedullary nailing group and one in the screw-plate group. Time to walking was 20 days on average in the intramedullary nailing group and 25 days in the screw-plate group. The mean Harris hip score was 60 in the intramedullary group and 59 in the screw-plate group. Discussion and conclusion Data in the literature report an advantage for intramedullary nailing, particularly a mechanical advantage, for the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures. Our findings show that good results are obtained with the screw-plate fixation using the DHS with less blood loss and at a lower cost.

Unstable diaphyseal fractures of both bones of the forearm in children: Plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing

This retrospective study evaluated the results of plating versus intramedullary fixation in the management of unstable, diaphyseal fractures of both bones of the forearm in children. Of the 64 children included, 45 were treated with intramedullary fixation, 19 with plating. Only A3 forearm fractures of the middle third or the transition zones were included; Galeazzi, Monteggia, and Greenstick fractures were excluded. Full radiological follow-up to union was obtained in all cases and 60 patients returned for clinical evaluation 32.3 months (plating) and 20.6 months (intramedullary fixation) after injury. The functional outcome did not differ significantly. In the intramedullary fixation group, we found two major complications (refracture and non-union) and nine minor complications (two delayed unions, three thumb neuropathies, two rod migrations, two skin infections). In the plate group, there were two major complications (refractures) and one minor complication (thumb neuropathy). Plating resulted in significantly worse results for surgical approach, operating times, frequency and duration of hospitalisation, and cosmetic outcome. In conclusion, intramedullary fixation of an unstable forearm fracture in skeletally immature patients is a safe, child-friendly, minimally invasive technique that allows early functional treatment with an excellent functional and cosmetic outcome.