BackgroundTibial shaft fractures are routinely managed with intramedullary nailing (IMN). An increasingly accepted technique is the suprapatellar (SP) approach. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of knee joint after tibia IMN through an suprapatellar (SP) or traditional infrapatellar (IP) approach.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed in patients with tibial shaft fractures that were treated with IMN through a SP or IP approach between 01/01/2014 and 31/12/2016. The clinical and functional outcomes of the knee were assessed with the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee Score. Secondary outcomes included the operation time and intraoperative blood loss.ResultsA total of 50 patients/fractures (26 IP and 24 SP) with a minimum follow-up of 15 months were evaluated. All fractures were OTA 42. No significant differences were found between the two groups in age, gender, side of fractures, operation time, intra-operative blood loss, and follow-up time. No significant difference was seen in HSS score (P = 0.62) between them. Sub analysis of all the HSS components scores revealed no significant differences between pain (P = 0.57), the stand and walk (P = 0.54), the need for walking stick (P = 0.60) and extension lag (P = 0.60). The other HSS components showed full scores (IP 10 vs. SP 10) in both approaches, including muscle force, flexion deformity and stability components. The range of motion (ROM) component score was superior in the IP group (P = 0.04) suggesting a higher ROM.ConclusionsBoth SP and IP approach results in equivalent overall HSS knee scores. However, for the HSS component, the IP approach was superior to SP approach regarding the ROM.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Tibial shaft fractures are routinely managed with intramedullary nailing (IMN). An increasingly accepted technique is the suprapatellar (SP) approach. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of knee joint after tibia IMN through an suprapatellar (SP) or traditional infrapatellar (IP) approach. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed in patients with tibial shaft fractures that were treated with IMN through a SP or IP approach between 01/01/2014 and 31/12/2016. The clinical and functional outcomes of the knee were assessed with the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee Score. Secondary outcomes included the operation time and intraoperative blood loss. Results: A total of 50 patients/fractures (26 IP and 24 SP) with a minimum follow-up of 15 months were evaluated. All fractures were OTA 42. No significant differences were found between the two groups in age, gender, side of fractures, operation time, intra-operative blood loss, and follow-up time. No significant difference was seen in HSS score ( P = 0.62) between them. Sub analysis of all the HSS components scores revealed no significant differences between pain ( P = 0.57), the stand and walk ( P = 0.54), the need for walking stick ( P = 0.60) and extension lag ( P = 0.60). The other HSS components showed full scores (IP 10 vs. SP 10) in both approaches, including muscle force, flexion deformity and stability components. The range of motion (ROM) component score was superior in the IP group ( P = 0.04) suggesting a higher ROM. Conclusions: Both SP and IP approach results in equivalent overall HSS knee scores. However, for the HSS component, the IP approach was superior to SP approach regarding the ROM.

Background: Tibial shaft fractures are routinely managed with intramedullary nailing (IMN). An increasingly accepted technique is the suprapatellar (SP) approach. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of knee joint after tibia IMN through an suprapatellar (SP) or traditional infrapatellar (IP) approach. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed in patients with tibial shaft fractures that were treated with tibia IMN through a SP or IP approach (1/2014-11/2016). The clinical and functional outcomes of knee joint were assessed with the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee Score. Further evaluation included the operation time, intraoperative blood loss. Results: A total of 50 patients/fractures (26 IP and 24 SP) with a follow-up for a minimum of 15 months were evaluated. All fractures were OTA 42. No significant differences were found between the two groups in age, gender, side of fractures, operation time, intra-operative blood loss, and follow-up time. No significant difference was seen in HSS score ( P = 0.62) between them. Analysis of all the HSS components scores revealed no significant differences between them concerning the pain ( P = 0.57), the stand and walk ( P = 0.54), the need for walking stick ( P = 0.60) and extension lag ( P = 0.60). The other HSS components showed full scores (IP 10 vs. SP 10) in both approaches, including muscle force, flexion deformity and stability components. The range of motion (ROM) component score was superior in the IP group ( P = 0.04) suggesting a higher ROM. Conclusions: The SP and IP approaches can get equivalent knee functional outcomes in the treatment of tibial shaft fracture concerning the overall HSS knee score. However, for the HSS component, the IP approach was superior to SP approach regarding the ROM.