• Jian Zou, Zhong-min Shi, Wei Zhang, and Chang-qing Zhang.
• Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital, Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
• J Invest Surg. 2012 Oct 1;25(5):326-9.

AbstractMinimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) was compared with traditional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in treating distal tibial fractures. Patients diagnosed with displaced extraarticular distal tibial fractures during October 2005-June 2007 were randomly assigned to a closed (treated using MIPPO) and an open (treated using ORIF) group. Ninety-four patients with fractures were treated and followed up, of which 42 and 52 patients were enrolled in the open and closed groups, respectively. The 94 fracture cases were classified into three types: Type A, 52 (55.3%); Type B, 24 (25.5%); and Type C, 18 (19.1%). The average follow-up time was 15.6 and 16.2 months for the open and closed groups, respectively. In the open group, 35 fractures healed within six months. Delayed union was observed in three fractures and nonunion in four fractures. Two cases had superficial wound infection after operation. No malunion was observed. In the closed group, 47 fractures healed within six months. Delayed union was observed in four fractures. Locking plate was broken nine months after operation in one case. Malunion was observed in five cases: two rotational and three posterior angular deformities. No statistically significant differences were observed in the healing time of Types A and B between the open and closed groups (p > .05). The healing time of Type C in the open group was longer than that in the closed group (p < .05). The first choice for Type C fractures is MIPPO, whereas that for Type A is open reduction.

23 keywords...

hide…