Intramedullary nail versus minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for displaced extraarticular proximal tibia fractures: a prospective comparative cohort study

PurposeThe treatment of extraarticular proximal tibial fractures is challenging. As the optimal fixation technique is still debated, the purpose of this study was to compare minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation.MethodsA prospective matched comparative study was conducted on patients with displaced extraarticular proximal tibia fractures treated with MIPO (n = 29) versus IMN (n = 30) fixation. Outcomes collected were the Johner-Wruhs grading, range of motion (ROM), union rate, time to union, malunion, coronal and sagittal alignment, and post-operative complications.ResultsUnion rates were similar between the MIPO and IMN groups (93% vs. 97%, P = 1.0). The IMN group had an earlier time to union (15 vs. 18 weeks, P < 0.001) and superior functional outcomes at one year (effective Johner-Wruhs score: 80% vs. 55%, P = 0.04).There was a significantly higher incidence of anterior knee pain in the IMN group (23% vs. 0%, P = 0.02) and there was a trend for more infections in the MIPO group (21% vs. 13%, P = 0.73).ConclusionIMN fixation of extraarticular proximal tibia fractures was associated with a shorter union time and better functional scores compared to MIPO.