No Difference in Short-Term Complications following Treatment of Closed Tibial Shaft Fractures with Intramedullary Nailing versus Plate Fixation

Abstract

Objectives. Tibial shaft fractures are treated with both intramedullary nailing (IMN) and plate fixation (ORIF). Using a large national database, we aimed to explore the differences in thirty-day complication rates between IMN and ORIF. Methods. Patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database who had undergone either tibial IMN or ORIF for closed fractures from 2010 to 2018 were identified using current procedural terminology (CPT) codes. After excluding all patients with open fractures, the propensity score was matching. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify risk factors associated with the thirty-day incidence of complications in the two cohorts. Results. A total of 5,400 patients were identified with 3,902 (72.3%) undergoing IMN and 1,498 (27.7%) ORIF. After excluding any ICD-10 diagnosis codes not pertaining to closed, traumatic tibial shaft fractures, 2,136 IMN and 621 ORIF cases remained. After matching, the baseline demographics were not significantly different between the cohorts. Following matching, the rate of any adverse event (aae) did not differ significantly between the IMN (7.08% (n = 44)) and ORIF (8.86% (n = 55)) cohorts ( $p=0.13$ ). There was also no significant difference in operative time (IMN = 98.5 min, ORIF = 100 min; $p=0.3$ ) or length of stay (IMN = 3.7 days, ORIF = 3.3 days; $p=0.08$ ) between the cohorts. Conclusion. There were no significant differences in short-term complications between cohorts. These are important data for the surgeon when considering surgical management of closed tibial shaft fractures.