Locked intramedullary nailing versus compression plating for stable ulna fractures: A comparative study

Abstract

Background: Isolated ulna shaft fractures (USFs) are a relatively uncommon, but significant, injury. For unstable USF treatment, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is the gold standard, while for stable USFs several procedures were described. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes in patients with stable USFs treated by either ORIF or intramedullary nail (IMN). Methods: According to their surgical treatment, 23 eligible USF-affected patients were divided into ORIF (14 subjects) and IMN (nine subjects) groups. The subjects underwent postoperative clinical follow-up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, which included calculation of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and radiological follow-up. Time to union, time to return to sporting and occupational activities, duration of physical therapy, and surgical complications were recorded. Results: DASH scores improved in both groups at the 6-month follow-up (p < 0.001). The IMN cohort recorded better DASH scores at the 1-and 3-month follow-ups, while similar results were reported at the 6-and 12-month follow-ups. Earlier fracture union (p = 0.001) and return to sporting activities and work (p = 0.002) were seen in the IMN group, compared with the ORIF group. No complications were observed in the IMN group. Conclusions: The surgical treatment of isolated USF results in excellent functional and radiographic outcomes. IMN may be preferable, compared with ORIF, due to its faster recovery time, expedited union, and reduced likelihood of complications.