Comparative Analysis of Complication Rates in Tibial Shaft Fractures: Intramedullary Nail vs. Ilizarov External...

Background: The external fixation (EF) Ilizarov method, shown to offer efficacy and relative safety, has unique biomechanical properties. Intramedullary nail fixation (IMN) is an advantageous alternative, offering biomechanical stability and a minimally invasive procedure. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes in patients undergoing tibia fracture fixation, comparing the Ilizarov EF and IMN methods in an early phase of IMN implementation in Serbia. Methods: This was a retrospective study including patients with radiologically confirmed closed and open (Gustilo and Anderson type I) tibial diaphysis fractures treated at the Institute for Orthopedic Surgery "Banjica'' from January 2013 to June 2017. The following demographic and clinical data were retrieved: age, sex, chronic disease diagnoses, length of hospital stay, surgical wait times, surgery length, type of anesthesia used, fracture, prophylaxis, mechanism of injury, postsurgical complications, time to recovery, and pain reduction. Pain intensity was measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), a self-reported scale ranging from 0 to 100 mm. Results: A total of 58 IMN patients were compared to 74 patients who underwent Ilizarov EF. Study groups differed in time to recovery (p < 0.001), length of hospitalization (p = 0.007), pain intensity at the fracture site (p < 0.001), and frequency of general anesthesia in favor of intramedullary fixation (p < 0.001). A shorter surgery time (p < 0.001) and less antibiotic use (p < 0.001) were observed when EF was used. Additionally, we identified that the intramedullary fixation was a significant predictor of pain intensity. Conclusions: The IMN method offers faster recovery and reduced pain intensity in comparison to EF, while the length of surgery predicted the occurrence of any complication.