• Yujun Li, Huan Luo, Yuan-Zhuang Chen, and Duo-Lian Huang.
• Department of Orthopaedics of Limbs and Joints, Jiangmen Central Hospital, Jiangmen, 529030, Guangdong, China.
• Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2021 May 25; 34 (5): 394-9.

ObjectiveTo compare clinical effect of intramedullary nailing through suprapatellar, infrapatellar and paracpatellar approach in treating tibial shaft fracture.MethodsFrom June 2012 to June 2018, 36 patients with tibial shaft fracture were treated with intramedullary nails, and were divided into three groups according to surgical approach. Twleve patients were through suprapatellar approach, including 7 males and 5 females aged from 25 to 53 years old with an average of (37.8±11.4) years old;and 4 patients were type A, 4 patients were type B, and 4 patients were type C according to AO classification. Ten patients were through infrapatellar approach, including 6 males and 4 females aged from 19 to 56 years old with an average of (35.6±10.0) years old;and 3 patients were type A, 4 patients were type B, and 3 patients were type C according to AO classification. Forteen patients were through paracpatellar approach, including 8 males and 6 females aged from 21 to 58 years old with an average of (36.6±10.0) years old;and 4 patients were type A, 6 patients were type B, and 4 patients were type C according to AO classification. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy times, fracture healing time and complications among three groups were observed, and knee joint functions were evaluated by Lysholm score.ResultsAll patients were followed up from 12 to 18 months with an average of (15.0±3.0) months. There were no difference in intraoperative blood loss and fracture healing time among three groups (P>0.05). There were statistical difference in operation time, fluoroscopy times and complications compared with suprapatellar approach and infrapatellar approach, paracpatellar approach (P<0.05). While there were no difference in operation time, fluoroscopy times and complications between infrapatellar approach and paracpatellar approach (P>0.05). Lysholm score among suprapatellar approach, infrapatellar approach and paracpatellar approach were (87.5±7.5), (78.2±6.7) and (77.4±6.3) respectively, and had differences among three groups (P<0.05). Compared with suprapatellar approach and infrapatellar approach, paracpatellar approach, there were difference in squatting, climbing stairs, pain and total scores (P<0.05);while there were no difference between infrapatellar and paracpatellar group (P>0.05).Conclusionintramedullary nailing through suprapatellar for the treatment of tibial shaft fracture is benefit for fracture healing and recovery of knee joint function, while infrapatellar and paracpatellar approach have advantages in exposure of insertion point. We should select approach reasonably according to our experience.

16 keywords...

hide…