COMPARATIVE STUDY OF EXTERNAL FIXATOR AND INTRAMEDULLARY NAILING IN PATIENTS WITH GUSTILO TIBIO FIBULAR FRACTURE TYPE III A: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

H ALI; S KHAN; SI ULLAH; W HAIDER

doi:10.54112/pjicm.v5i01.69

Authors

H ALI Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan
S KHAN Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan
SI ULLAH Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan
W HAIDER Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/pjicm.v5i01.69

Keywords:

Gustilo IIIA Fracture, Intramedullary Nailing, External Fixation, Tibiofibular Fracture, Randomized Controlled Trial, Fracture Union, Infection Rates

Abstract

Background: Gustilo type IIIA tibiofibular fractures present a significant challenge in orthopedic trauma due to extensive soft tissue damage and high risk of complications such as infection, malunion, and non-union. Optimal fixation strategy remains debated, particularly in severe open fractures. Objective: To assess and compare the clinical outcomes of intramedullary nailing (IMN) versus external fixation (EF) in the management of Gustilo type IIIA tibiofibular fractures. Study Design: Prospective randomized controlled trial. Setting: Conducted at Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan. Duration of Study: January 2024 to June 2024. Methods: A total of 140 patients aged 18–65 years with confirmed Gustilo type IIIA tibiofibular fractures were enrolled and randomized into two equal groups: IMN group (n=70) and EF group (n=70). All procedures were performed under standardized surgical protocols. The primary clinical outcomes assessed included fracture union, malunion, non-union, infection, and need for reoperation. Follow-up assessments were conducted for at least 12 months postoperatively. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 26. Chi-square test was used for categorical variables and p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The IMN group showed superior clinical outcomes to the EF group. Successful union was achieved in 91.4% of IMN patients versus 78.6% in the EF group (p=0.03). Malunion rates were lower in the IMN group (4.3% vs. 14.3%, p=0.04), as were non-union (5.7% vs. 17.1%, p=0.03), reoperation (7.1% vs. 18.6%, p=0.04), and infection rates (4.3% vs. 18.6%, p=0.008). Conclusion: Intramedullary nailing demonstrated significantly better outcomes than external fixation in managing Gustilo type IIIA tibiofibular fractures, with higher union rates, fewer infections, and reduced need for reoperation. IMN should be considered a preferable option for this fracture type in appropriately selected patients.

References

Elniel AR, Giannoudis P V. Open fractures of the lower extremity. EFORT Open Rev. 2018;3(5):316–25

Chaudhuri A, Datta S, Ghosh P, Patil D, Sinha S, Ghosh S. Comparative studies on intramedullary nailing versus ao external fixation in the management of gustilo type II, IIIA, and IIIB tibial shaft fractures. Saudi J Sports Med. 2015;15(3):262-8.

Fang X, Jiang L, Wang Y, Zhao L. Treatment of Gustilo grade III tibial fractures with unreamed intramedullary nailing versus external fixator: A meta-analysis. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18(4):49-56.

Kaftandziev I, Pejkova S, Saveski J. Operative treatment of III grade open fractures of the tibial diaphysis. Prilozi. 2006;27(1):121–31.

Bibbo C, Brueggeman J. Prevention and management of complications arising from external fixation pin sites. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2010;49(1):87-92.

Lam SW, Teraa M, Leenen LPH, van der Heijden GJMG. Systematic review shows lowered risk of nonunion after reamed nailing in patients with closed tibial shaft fractures. Injury. 2010;41(7):671-5

Shanmugasundaram S, Panda SR, Samundeeswari S, Kumar D. Titanium elastic nails in the management of fractures. Orthop Trauma Implantol, 2023.

Alsharef JF, Ghaddaf AA, AlQuhaibi MS, Shaheen EA, AboAljadiel LH, Alharbi AS, et al. External fixation versus intramedullary nailing for the management of open tibial fracture: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int Orthopaed. 2023;47(12):3077-97

Elnewishy A, Elkholy M, Hamada A, Salem M, Salem Jr M. Comparing minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis with interlocking intramedullary nail fixation for the management of adult extra-articular distal tibial fractures: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e49214

Ali P, Jatoi F, Hussain M, Muhammad D, Matlo E, Khoso RE, Sajjad M, et al. Comparison of the outcome of intramedullary nailing versus external fixator fracture repair in Gustilo type IIIA tibio fibular fracture. Pak Armed Forces Med J. 2022;72(4):1482–6.

Munif MA, Latif M. Efficacy of intramedullary nailing versus external fixation in treating Gustilo type IIIA tibiofibular fractures. Med Forum. 2024;35(12):152–5.

Umrani KB, Tunio ZH, Mengal MA, Qureshi AH, Ahmed P, Kalhoro N. Comparative study on intramedullary nailing versus AO external fixation in the management of Gustilo type II, IIIA, and IIIB tibial shaft fractures. Prof Med J. 2020;27(6):1199–205.

Giovannini F, de Palma L, Panfighi A, Marinelli M. Intramedullary nailing versus external fixation in Gustilo type III open tibial shaft fractures: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2016;11(1):1–4.