Abstract
This prospective Randomised Controlled Trial compared two surgical approaches with respect to accuracy of guidewire and tibial nail position.
Sixty-seven patients with tibial fractures were randomised to semi-extended (SE) or standard (S) approaches of nail insertion. Fluoroscopy was performed at guidewire insertion and final nail position. The SE approach is more proximal with the guidewire inserted posterior to the patella, theoretically allowing a better angle for more accurate nail placement.
Measurements were taken in the Anteroposterior and lateral planes of both the nail and guidewire to determine deviation from the optimal angle of insertion (relative to the long axes of the tibial shaft). Thirty-nine and twenty-eight patients were treated with semiextended and standard approaches respectively.
The semiextended approach resulted in improved nail placement to statistical significance in both planes, with mean deviation from the optimal angle of insertion as below:
Guidewire AP 3.2° (SE) versus 4° (S) Lateral 27.1° (SE) versus 30.2° (S)
Nail AP 2.4° (SE) versus 4.2° (S) Lateral 17.9° (SE) versus 21.8° (S)
Poor positioning of the guidewire leads to excessive anterior placement of the nail by eccentric reaming. Anterior positioning of the guidewire and nail in the lateral plane was assessed. This was expressed as a percentage from the anterior cortex of the tibia.
Guidewire: Lateral 9.7% (SE) versus 9.3% (S)
Nail: Lateral 23.4% (SE) 19.3% (S) (p 0.043)
Semiextended nailing allows a better angle for guidewire placement and a more optimal final nail position. This facilitates accurate nail placement particularly in difficult proximal third fractures.
