Purpose: To compare the intraoperative procedural efficiency of antegrade and retrograde locked intramedullary nailing of diaphyseal femur fractures without intraoperative fluoroscopy, power reaming devices and fracture tables.
Methods: A secondary analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted on 238 isolated diaphyseal femur fractures fixed with SIGN Standard and Fin nails within three weeks of injury. The data included baseline patient and fracture characteristics, nail type and diameter, fracture reduction methods, operative times and outcome measures.
Results: There were 84 and 154 fractures in the antegrade and retrograde groups respectively. Both groups were similar vis-a-vis baseline patient and fracture characteristics. Closed reduction of the fractures was significantly easier for retrograde than an antegrade approach. The retrograde approach more readily permitted the use of Fin nails. The mean nail diameter used for retrograde was significantly larger than that for antegrade. The time taken to achieve retrograde nailing was significantly lesser than that of antegrade. There was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes of the two groups.
Conclusion: In the absence of expensive fracture-surgery gadgets, retrograde nailing offers many procedural advantages over antegrade, such as easier closed reduction and canal reaming, the greater possibility of using the Fin nail with fewer interlocking screws and shorter operative times. However, we acknowledge the lack of randomisation and the presence of an unequal number of fractures in the two groups as limitations of this study.
Keywords: Antegrade; Femur fractures; Locked intramedullary nailing; Low- and middle-income countries; Procedural efficiency; Retrograde.
© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to SICOT aisbl.