ABSTRACT

Purpose:

We reported comparison of the clinical results of locked intamedullary nailing and ORIF in tibial shaft fractures.

Matherial and Methods:

We evaluated 47 tibia shaft fractures in 45 patients that were treated with ORIF and locked intamedullary nailing retrospectively. 17 of 25 patients that were treated with ORIF were women (68%) and 8 were men (32%) and the avarageage were 35.5 years (17-67). 5 of 20 patients that treated with locked intramedullary nailing were women(25%) and 15 were men (75%) and the avarage age were 48.7 years (19-85). The avarage follow up was 40 months (40-91). We compared union time, functional results and complications.

Results:

In the ORIF group there were 96% union, 4% nonunion, 8% joint stiffness and 8% infection. We evaluated 81% perfect and good results in this group. Avarage union time was 15.9 weeks in this group. In the locked intramedullary group there were 100% union, 4% süperficial infection. We evaluated 95% perfect and good results in this group. The avarage union time was 13.8 weeks.

Conclusion:

Although locked intramedullary nailing technique has been used frequently for the treatment of tibial shaft fractures recently, we found that the clinical results of the patients treated with ORIF and intramedullary nailing are similar. As a conclusion we think that ORIF is a good alternative in tibial shaft fractures in condition that intramedullary nailing cannot be used because of technical and other problems.