Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of retrograde tibial intramedullary nail and antegrade tibial intramedullary nail in the treatment of patients with extra-articular distal tibial fractures. Methods A retrospective review was conducted for 56 patients admitted to our department with extra-articular distal tibial fractures between August 2020 to August 2022. Twenty-three patients were treated with retrograde intramedullary nail fixation and 33 patients were treated with anterograde intramedullary nail fixation. Baseline characteristics, surgical time, fluoroscopy frequency, hospital stay, fracture healing time, complete weight-bearing time, distal tibial articular surface angulation, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score at the last follow-up, and other complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. Results All patients were followed up for 12-20 months. In the retrograde intramedullary nail group, the average distance of the fracture line to the distal tibial articular surface was shorter than that of the anterograde intramedullary nail group, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in other general clinical data between the two groups of patients. The average number of fluoroscopy times in the anterograde intramedullary nail group was higher than that in the retrograde intramedullary nail group, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.001). The complete weight-bearing time and fracture healing time of the retrograde intramedullary nail group were better than those of the anterograde intramedullary nail group, and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.002 and P=0.018). There were 4 cases of postoperative complications in the retrograde intramedullary nail group and 10 cases in the anterograde intramedullary nail group, with no statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications. Conclusions Both retrograde and antegrade intramedullary nails are effective methods for treating extra-articular distal tibial fractures. Retrograde intramedullary nails have the advantages of number of intraoperative fluoroscopy, complete weight-bearing time, and fracture healing time.
Key words
Extra-articular distal tibial fractures; /
/
Retrograde tibial intramedullary nails; /
/
Antegrade tibial intramedullary nails; /
/
Full weight-bearing; /
/
Fracture union; /
/
Minimally invasive treatment
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] 熊远飞, 刘晖, 许遵营, 等. 胫骨逆行髓内钉在高危人群胫骨远端关节外骨折中的应用研究 [J]. 骨科, 2024, 15(1): 71-75. DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674⁃8573.2024.01.014.
[2] 何敏, 李正茂, 谭文甫, 等. 新型逆行胫骨髓内钉治疗胫骨远端骨折的初步疗效分析 [J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2022, 24(4): 334-338. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115530-20211014-00444.
[3] LIU XK, XU WN, XUE QY, et al. Intramedullary Nailing Versus Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis for Distal Tibial Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J]. Orthop Surg, 2019, 11(6): 954-965. DOI:10.1111/os.12575.
[4] 任磊, 扈克治, 陈惠, 等. 不同内固定方式在胫骨远端骨折中的疗效比较 [J]. 创伤外科杂志, 2023, 25(12): 909-915. DOI:10.3969/j.issn．1009-4237.2023.12.006.
[5] Kuhn S, Appelmann P, Pairon P, et al. The Retrograde Tibial Nail: presentation and biomechanical evaluation of a new concept in the treatment of distal tibia fractures[J]. Injury, 2014, 45 Suppl 1: S81-S86. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.10.025.
[6] 王义昌, 林文杰, 林涛, 等. 胫骨远端骨折三种内固定方式的有限元分析 [J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2023, 27(36): 5760-5765. DOI:10.12307/2023.721.
[7] Kariya A, Jain P, Patond K, et al. Outcome and complications of distal tibia fractures treated with intramedullary nails versus minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and the role of fibula fixation [J]. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2020, 30(8): 1487-1498. DOI:10.1007/s00590-020-02726-y.
[8] 梁力, 闫文荷, 林世磅. 新型逆行髓内钉治疗胫骨远端骨折的临床疗效 [J]. 中国伤残医学, 2023, 31(2):33-36.DOI: 10.13214/j cnki.cjotadm. 2023.02.008.
[9] 胡廷建. 髓内钉与传统钢板螺丝内固定治疗胫骨远端骨折的疗效研究 [J]. 中国现代药物应用, 2019, 13(24): 39-41. DOI:10.14164/j.cnki.cn11-5581/r.2019.24.017.
[10]李波, 赖培丰, 郭福溪, 等. 对比分析L型钢板与传统锁定钢板内固定术治疗胫骨远端骨折患者的效果 [J]. 现代诊断与治疗, 2022, 33(8): 1190-1193.DOI:1190-3.1001-8174(2022)08-1190-03.
[11]高峰, 王秀会, 夏胜利, 等. 髌上入路与髌下入路胫骨髓内钉治疗胫骨远端骨折的比较 [J]. 生物骨科材料与临床研究, 2024, 21(2): 53-56. DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1672-5972.2024.02.011.
[12] 喻景奕, 周公社, 位新维, 等. 阻挡钉快速置入技术在闭合复位交锁髓内钉内固定治疗胫骨远侧干骺端骨折中的应用[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2019, 21(2):127-132. DOI：10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7600. 2019. 02. 006.
[13]Graulich T, Gerhardy J, Omar Pacha T, et al. Patella baja after intramedullary nailing of tibial fractures, using an infrapatellar/transtendinous approach, predicts worse patient reported outcome[J]. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2022, 48(5):3669-3675. DOI: 10.1007/s00068-021-01807-9.
[14]He M, Jiang Z, Tan W, et al. Ideal entry point and direction of retrograde intramedullary nailing of the tibia[J]. J Orthop Surg Res,2023,18(1): 472. DOI:10.1186/s13018-023-03921-3.
PDF(5812 KB)
