• Cagri Ozcan, Ismail Turkmen, and Sami Sokucu.
• Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, SBU Umraniye Training and Research Hospital, Elmalikent mh, Umraniye, 34764, Istanbul, Turkey. cagriozcann@gmail.com.
• Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020 Feb 1; 46 (1): 99-105.

PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare anterior knee pain and functional outcomes in patients who underwent intramedullary tibial nailing using transpatellar, medial parapatellar or suprapatellar nail entry methods.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent tibial fracture repair in our clinic between January 2010 and March 2017. After applying the exclusion criteria, 58 patients were included in the study. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the nailing approach: medial parapatellar, transpatellar or suprapatellar. Age, body mass index, follow-up duration, Kujala Score, Lysholm Knee Score, anterior knee pain, length of hospitalization and surgical duration were assessed.ResultsOf the 58 patients studied, 21 underwent a transpatellar (TP) approach, 16 a medial parapatellar (MP) approach, and 21 a suprapatellar (SP) approach. The mean Kujala Score of patients who had the TP approach was 80 ± 7.15 (72-93) and the average Lysholm Knee Score was 80.23 ± 8.74 (70-95). There was no statistically significant difference between Kujala Scores (p = 0.38) or Lysholm Knee Scores (p 0.06) among the groups; similarly, no statistically significant difference was found among the three groups in terms of anterior knee pain, length of hospitalization or surgical duration (p > 0.05).ConclusionThe suprapatellar tibia nailing method is as safe and reliable as transpatellar and medial parapatellar methods in terms of effect on postoperative anterior knee pain and functional outcomes.Level Of EvidenceLevel 3 case-control study.

24 keywords...

hide…