BACKGROUND: This prospective study aimed to compare clinical effects of intramedullary nailing guided by digital and conventional technologies in treatment of tibial fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients (mean age 43 years, 18 males and 14 females) who were treated for tibial fractures from October 2010 to October 2012 were enrolled. They were sequentially randomized to receive intramedullary nailing guided by either digital technology (digital group, n=16) or conventional technology (conventional group, n=16). The operation time, fluoroscopy times, fracture healing time, distance between the actual and planned insertion point, postoperative lower limb alignment, and functional recovery were recorded for all patients.

RESULTS: The mean operation time in the digital group was 43.1±6.2 min compared with 48.7±8.3 min for the conventional technology (P=0.039). The fluoroscopy times and distance between the actual and planned insertion point were significantly lower in the digital group than in the conventional group (both P<0.001). The accuracy rate of the insertion point was 99.12% by digital technology. No difference was found in fracture healing time and good postoperative lower limb alignment between the digital and conventional groups (P=0.083 and P=0.310), as well as the effective rate (100% vs. 87.50%, P=0.144).

CONCLUSIONS: Intramedullary nailing guided by digital technology has many advantages in treatment of tibial fractures compared to conventional technology, including shorter operation time, reduced fluoroscopy times, and decreased distance between the actual and planned insertion point of the intramedullary nail.

Keywords: Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary, Recovery of Function, Tibial Fractures