This study compared the results of external fixation combined with limited open reduction and internal fixation (EF + LORIF), minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO), and intramedullary nailing (IMN) for distal tibia fractures. A total of 84 patients with distal tibia shaft fractures were randomized to operative stabilization using EF + LORIF (28 cases), MIPPO (28 cases), or IMN (28 cases). The 3 groups were comparable with respect to patient demographics. Data were collected on operative time and radiation time, union time, complications, time of recovery to work, secondary operations, and measured joint function using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. There was no significant difference in time to union, incidence of union status, time of recovery to work, and AOFAS scores among the 3 groups (P>.05). Mean operative time and radiation time in the MIPPO group were longer than those in the IMN or EF + LORIF groups (P<.05). Wound complications after MIPPO were more common compared with IMN or EF + LORIF (P<.05). Anterior knee pain occurred frequently after IMN (32.1%), and irritation symptoms were encountered more frequently after MIPPO (46.4%). Although EF + LORIF was associated with fewer secondary procedures vs MIPPO or IMN, it was related with more pin-tract infections (14.3%). Findings indicated that EF + LORIF, MIPPO, and IMN all achieved similar good functional results. However, EF + LORIF had some advantages over MIPPO and IMN in reducing operative and radiation times, postoperative complications, and reoperation rate. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(4):e627-e633.].

Level II prospective randomized study.

The objective of this study was to prospectively compare intraoperative fluoroscopy time and clinical and radiological results in pediatric femoral shaft fractures treated with titanium elastic nailing (TEN) using a small-incision, blind-hand reduction vs closed reduction. From February 2008 to December 2009, sixty-eight children were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups: group A comprised 34 patients treated with a small-incision, blind-hand reduction technique and group B comprised 34 patients treated with a closed reduction technique. Operative time, intraoperative fluoroscopy time, fracture union time, and complications were recorded in both groups. Clinical and radiological results were assessed using the TEN scoring system. Mean operative time was 30.5±8.5 in group A and 53.0±15.0 minutes in group B, and mean fluoroscopy time was 28.4±18.5 seconds in group A and 65.0±28.5 seconds in group B. Operative time and fluoroscopy time were significantly longer in group B (P<.001). According to the TEN scoring system, the results were excellent in 31 patients and good in 3 patients in group A and excellent in 29 patients and good in 5 patients in group B. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of clinical and radiological results. There was also no significant difference in terms of fracture healing time, weight-bearing time, and complications. The small-incision, blind-hand reduction technique provided similar clinical results as closed reduction. This technique could be an alternative to closed reduction because it significantly reduced intraoperative radiation exposure and operative time.