Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Dec 15:36:36-48.
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2022.12.007. eCollection 2023 Feb.

Comparison of outcomes of retrograde intramedullary nailing versus locking plate fixation in distal femur fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 936 patients in 16 studies

Sameer Aggarwal  1 , Rajesh Kumar Rajnish  2 , Prasoon Kumar  1 , Amit Srivastava  3 , Kuldeep Rathor  2 , Rehan Ul Haq  4
Affiliations
Review

Comparison of outcomes of retrograde intramedullary nailing versus locking plate fixation in distal femur fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 936 patients in 16 studies

Sameer Aggarwal et al. J Orthop. .

Abstract

Background: The surgical treatment for distal femur fractures has evolved over time, and it depends upon certain factors; open or closed fracture type, the pattern of fracture, presence of metaphyseal comminution, intra-articular extension, and the bone quality are some of the crucial ones. Both retrograde intramedullary nails (RIMN) and locking plates (LP) can be used for the fixation of these fractures. However, the optimal method among the two devices is still a topic of debate, the superiority of one over the other being unclear. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis was conceptualized to compare the outcomes of RIMN with distal femur LP.

Methods: The primary electronic search was conducted on Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane Library databases for the published literature from the inception to 25th February 2022. The studies compared outcomes of RIMN versus LP fixation of the acute supracondylar or distal femur fracture (AO/OTA type-33A, B, and C) and reported at least one primary (mean fracture union time, complications, implant-related complications, and re-operation rate) or secondary outcome (duration of surgery, intra-operative blood loss, and knee range of motion), were included.

Results: Six randomized control trials, 2 prospective and 8 retrospective studies with 936 patients with 8 bilateral cases (467: RIMN; 477: LP) were included. Our analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in terms of mean fracture union time, overall complications, implant-related complications, re-operation rates, and duration of surgeries. Although a better knee range of motion was seen in the LP group, however, it also showed more nonunion and infection than the RIMN group.

Conclusion: The present review shows that there are significantly lesser nonunions and infections, in the RIMN group as compared to LP for distal femur fractures, although a better postoperative knee range of motion was seen in the latter. However, in terms of fracture union time, the overall rate of complications, re-operation rates, and duration of surgeries, there is no difference between the two surgical options.

Keywords: Distal femoral locking plate; Distal femoral nail; Distal femur fracture; Locking plate; Retrograde femoral nail; Supracondylar femur fracture.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram of study selection.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
(a) Risk of bias summary for a non-nonrandomized, and (b) Randomized studies.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
(a) Risk of bias graph for nonrandomized, and (b) Randomized studies.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Funnel plot showing a skewed distribution suggestive of possible publication bias.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot comparing mean fracture union time.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot comparing overall complications.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Forest plot comparing nonunion.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Forest plot comparing delayed union.
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Forest plot comparing malunion.
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Forest plot comparing knee stiffness.
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Forest plot comparing knee pain.
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
Forest plot comparing infection.
Fig. 13
Fig. 13
Forest plot comparing implant-related complication.
Fig. 14
Fig. 14
Forest plot comparing the re-operation rate.
Fig. 15
Fig. 15
Forest plot comparing the duration of surgery.
Fig. 16
Fig. 16
Forest plot comparing intra-operative blood loss.
Fig. 17
Fig. 17
Forest plot comparing knee range of motion.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Court-Brown C.M., Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: a review. Injury. 2006;37(8):691–697. - PubMed
    1. Gwathmey F.W., Jr., Jones-Quaidoo S.M., Kahler D., Hurwitz S., Cui Q. Distal femoral fractures: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18(10):597–607. - PubMed
    1. Zlowodzki M., Bhandari M., Marek D.J., Cole P.A., Kregor P.J. Operative treatment of acute distal femur fractures: systematic review of two comparative studies and 45 case series (1989-2005) J Orthop Trauma. 2006;20:366–371. - PubMed
    1. Walcher F., Frank J., Marzi I. Retrogradenailing of distal femoral fracture–clear andpotential indications. Eur J Trauma. 2000;26(4):155–168.
    1. Wenger D., Andersson S. Low risk of nonunion with lateral locked plating of distal femoral fractures-A retrospective study of 191 consecutive patients. Injury. 2019;50(2):448–452. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources