[Intramedullary nailing of lower leg fractures with minimal soft tissue injuries]

Abstract

The importance of intramedullary nailing (IM) for closed and type I tibial shaft fractures is evaluated on the basis of a review of the recent literature (1991-1996) and the data on 61 patients that underwent a reamed (RTN; n = 31) or an unreamed (UTN; n = 26) procedure. There was no difference between the two groups in age, fracture type or localization. Soft tissue trauma prevailed with 38% type I open fractures in the UTN group (RTN group, 3%). Both groups showed about the same proportion of good and very good results (criteria of Johner and Wruhs; 89% RTN and 88% UTN), which corresponds to the results of other authors (83%-96% RTN; 79%-96% UTN). The rate of nonunions is about the same with 6% (RTN) and 4% (UTN), respectively, and there were no infections. In accordance with the literature, we found earlier osseous reunion after unreamed nailing (RTN = 18 weeks vs UTN = 12 weeks). This corresponds to early, painless, full weight-bearing after an average of 10.3 as opposed to 13.8 weeks in the RTN group. Except for earlier osseous reunion reamed and unreamed TN proved to be equivalent procedures. As a precondition, if more endostium is affected, reaming should be performed after stabilization of the soft tissue damage, and fractures of the metaphysis should be interlocked in two dimensions (using all interlocking possibilities) if treated with the more unstable UTN, along with reduced weight-bearing for at least 6 weeks. The implant should be chosen in compliance with individual demands, taking the higher intramedullary stability of the RTN into consideration and the endostium-preserving insertion of the UTN.