Retrospective study examines growth disturbance after rigid nailing in pediatric patients, suggesting safe treatment practices.
Introduction: Tibial shaft fractures are common in the pediatric population. As patients approach skeletal maturity, rigid intramedullary nailing of these fractures is a potentially advantageous option, allowing rigid fixation and earlier mobilization and weight-bearing. However, potential injury to the open proximal tibial physis in patients with remaining growth remains a concern. This study sought to determine the rate of growth disturbance following rigid, transphyseal tibial nailing of tibial shaft fractures in patients with open physes. Methods: This was a retrospective study of skeletally immature patients who were treated with transphyseal nailing of a tibial shaft fracture. Included patients had at least 1 year of growth remaining, as determined by the Modified Fels Skeletal Maturity System, and at least 1 year of follow-up. Growth disturbance was determined by a change in posterior tibial slope or medial proximal tibial angle on radiographs obtained at the time of injury as compared with radiographs at final follow-up. Results: A total of 20 patients were included in the study. The mean chronological age of the cohort was 14.5 years (SD=1.47, range: 12 to 17 y) at the time of injury. The mean skeletal age at the time of injury in female patients was 12.6 years (SD=0.4, range: 12.0 to 13.0) and in males, 14.4 years (SD=0.7, range: 12.5 to 15.0). The cohort had a mean of 1.51 years of growth remaining (SD=0.6, range: 1 to 3.5 y). There was no significant change in the mean posterior tibial slope or medial proximal tibial angle between injury and final radiographs ( P =0.467, 0.906, respectively). Two patients developed a decrease in posterior tibial slope angle (flattening of slope) of greater than 3 degrees (3.9 and 6.7 degrees). Conclusions: Rigid transphyseal nailing of pediatric tibial shaft fractures in patients with open physes who are approaching maturity remains a safe treatment option; however, when more than 1 year of growth remains, surgeons must carefully monitor patients for the development of angular deformity at the knee.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Siebert et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: