Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT

Background: The best treatment for fractures of the distal tibia remains controversial. Most of these fractures require surgical fixation, but the outcomes are unpredictable and complications are common. Objectives: To assess disability, quality of life, complications and resource use in patients tr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Matthew L Costa, Juul Achten, Susie Hennings, Nafisa Boota, James Griffin, Stavros Petrou, Mandy Maredza, Melina Dritsaki, Thomas Wood, James Masters, Ian Pallister, Sarah E Lamb, Nick R Parsons
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: NIHR Journals Library 2018-05-01
Series:Health Technology Assessment
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3310/hta22250
id doaj-239b056725a34a658663b260853e62de
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Matthew L Costa
Juul Achten
Susie Hennings
Nafisa Boota
James Griffin
Stavros Petrou
Mandy Maredza
Melina Dritsaki
Thomas Wood
James Masters
Ian Pallister
Sarah E Lamb
Nick R Parsons
spellingShingle Matthew L Costa
Juul Achten
Susie Hennings
Nafisa Boota
James Griffin
Stavros Petrou
Mandy Maredza
Melina Dritsaki
Thomas Wood
James Masters
Ian Pallister
Sarah E Lamb
Nick R Parsons
Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
Health Technology Assessment
author_facet Matthew L Costa
Juul Achten
Susie Hennings
Nafisa Boota
James Griffin
Stavros Petrou
Mandy Maredza
Melina Dritsaki
Thomas Wood
James Masters
Ian Pallister
Sarah E Lamb
Nick R Parsons
author_sort Matthew L Costa
title Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
title_short Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
title_full Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
title_fullStr Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
title_full_unstemmed Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT
title_sort intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the uk fixdt rct
publisher NIHR Journals Library
series Health Technology Assessment
issn 1366-5278
2046-4924
publishDate 2018-05-01
description Background: The best treatment for fractures of the distal tibia remains controversial. Most of these fractures require surgical fixation, but the outcomes are unpredictable and complications are common. Objectives: To assess disability, quality of life, complications and resource use in patients treated with intramedullary (IM) nail fixation versus locking plate fixation in the 12 months following a fracture of the distal tibia. Design: This was a multicentre randomised trial. Setting: The trial was conducted in 28 UK acute trauma centres from April 2013 to final follow-up in February 2017. Participants: In total, 321 adult patients were recruited. Participants were excluded if they had open fractures, fractures involving the ankle joint, contraindication to nailing or inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions: IM nail fixation (n = 161), in which a metal rod is inserted into the hollow centre of the tibia, versus locking plate fixation (n = 160), in which a plate is attached to the surface of the tibia with fixed-angle screws. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the Disability Rating Index (DRI) score, which ranges from 0 points (no disability) to 100 points (complete disability), at 6 months with a minimum clinically important difference of 8 points. The DRI score was also collected at 3 and 12 months. The secondary outcomes were the Olerud–Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), quality of life as measured using EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), complications such as infection, and further surgery. Resource use was collected to inform the health economic evaluation. Results: Participants had a mean age of 45 years (standard deviation 16.2 years), were predominantly male (61%, 197/321) and had experienced traumatic injury after a fall (69%, 223/321). There was no statistically significant difference in DRI score at 6 months [IM nail fixation group, mean 29.8 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.1 to 33.7 points; locking plate group, mean 33.8 points, 95% CI 29.7 to 37.9 points; adjusted difference, 4.0 points, 95% CI –1.0 to 9.0 points; p = 0.11]. There was a statistically significant difference in DRI score at 3 months in favour of IM nail fixation (IM nail fixation group, mean 44.2 points, 95% CI 40.8 to 47.6 points; locking plate group, mean 52.6 points, 95% CI 49.3 to 55.9 points; adjusted difference 8.8 points, 95% CI 4.3 to 13.2 points; p < 0.001), but not at 12 months (IM nail fixation group, mean 23.1 points, 95% CI 18.9 to 27.2 points; locking plate group, 24.0 points, 95% CI 19.7 to 28.3 points; adjusted difference 1.9 points, 95% CI –3.2 to 6.9 points; p = 0.47). Secondary outcomes showed the same pattern, including a statistically significant difference in mean OMAS and EQ-5D scores at 3 and 6 months in favour of IM nail fixation. There were no statistically significant differences in complications, including the number of postoperative infections (13% in the locking plate group and 9% in the IM nail fixation group). Further surgery was more common in the locking plate group (12% in locking plate group and 8% in IM nail fixation group at 12 months). The economic evaluation showed that IM nail fixation provided a slightly higher quality of life in the 12 months after injury and at lower cost and, therefore, it was cost-effective compared with locking plate fixation. The probability of cost-effectiveness for IM nail fixation exceeded 90%, regardless of the value of the cost-effectiveness threshold. Limitations: As wound dressings after surgery are clearly visible, it was not possible to blind the patients to their treatment allocation. This evidence does not apply to intra-articular (pilon) fractures of the distal tibia. Conclusions: Among adults with an acute fracture of the distal tibia who were randomised to IM nail fixation or locking plate fixation, there were similar disability ratings at 6 months. However, recovery across all outcomes was faster in the IM nail fixation group and costs were lower. Future work: The potential benefit of IM nail fixation in several other fractures requires investigation. Research is also required into the role of adjuvant treatment and different rehabilitation strategies to accelerate recovery following a fracture of the tibia and other long-bone fractures in the lower limb. The patients in this trial will remain in longer-term follow-up. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99771224 and UKCRN 13761. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
url https://doi.org/10.3310/hta22250
work_keys_str_mv AT matthewlcosta intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT juulachten intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT susiehennings intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT nafisaboota intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT jamesgriffin intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT stavrospetrou intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT mandymaredza intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT melinadritsaki intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT thomaswood intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT jamesmasters intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT ianpallister intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT sarahelamb intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
AT nickrparsons intramedullarynailfixationversuslockingplatefixationforadultswithafractureofthedistaltibiatheukfixdtrct
_version_ 1716823953057513472
spelling doaj-239b056725a34a658663b260853e62de2020-11-24T20:41:46ZengNIHR Journals LibraryHealth Technology Assessment1366-52782046-49242018-05-01222510.3310/hta2225011/136/04Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCTMatthew L Costa0Juul Achten1Susie Hennings2Nafisa Boota3James Griffin4Stavros Petrou5Mandy Maredza6Melina Dritsaki7Thomas Wood8James Masters9Ian Pallister10Sarah E Lamb11Nick R Parsons12Clinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKOxford Trauma, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology & Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UKDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UKDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UKMedical School, Swansea University, Swansea, WalesClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKClinical Trials Unit, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UKBackground: The best treatment for fractures of the distal tibia remains controversial. Most of these fractures require surgical fixation, but the outcomes are unpredictable and complications are common. Objectives: To assess disability, quality of life, complications and resource use in patients treated with intramedullary (IM) nail fixation versus locking plate fixation in the 12 months following a fracture of the distal tibia. Design: This was a multicentre randomised trial. Setting: The trial was conducted in 28 UK acute trauma centres from April 2013 to final follow-up in February 2017. Participants: In total, 321 adult patients were recruited. Participants were excluded if they had open fractures, fractures involving the ankle joint, contraindication to nailing or inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions: IM nail fixation (n = 161), in which a metal rod is inserted into the hollow centre of the tibia, versus locking plate fixation (n = 160), in which a plate is attached to the surface of the tibia with fixed-angle screws. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the Disability Rating Index (DRI) score, which ranges from 0 points (no disability) to 100 points (complete disability), at 6 months with a minimum clinically important difference of 8 points. The DRI score was also collected at 3 and 12 months. The secondary outcomes were the Olerud–Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), quality of life as measured using EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), complications such as infection, and further surgery. Resource use was collected to inform the health economic evaluation. Results: Participants had a mean age of 45 years (standard deviation 16.2 years), were predominantly male (61%, 197/321) and had experienced traumatic injury after a fall (69%, 223/321). There was no statistically significant difference in DRI score at 6 months [IM nail fixation group, mean 29.8 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.1 to 33.7 points; locking plate group, mean 33.8 points, 95% CI 29.7 to 37.9 points; adjusted difference, 4.0 points, 95% CI –1.0 to 9.0 points; p = 0.11]. There was a statistically significant difference in DRI score at 3 months in favour of IM nail fixation (IM nail fixation group, mean 44.2 points, 95% CI 40.8 to 47.6 points; locking plate group, mean 52.6 points, 95% CI 49.3 to 55.9 points; adjusted difference 8.8 points, 95% CI 4.3 to 13.2 points; p < 0.001), but not at 12 months (IM nail fixation group, mean 23.1 points, 95% CI 18.9 to 27.2 points; locking plate group, 24.0 points, 95% CI 19.7 to 28.3 points; adjusted difference 1.9 points, 95% CI –3.2 to 6.9 points; p = 0.47). Secondary outcomes showed the same pattern, including a statistically significant difference in mean OMAS and EQ-5D scores at 3 and 6 months in favour of IM nail fixation. There were no statistically significant differences in complications, including the number of postoperative infections (13% in the locking plate group and 9% in the IM nail fixation group). Further surgery was more common in the locking plate group (12% in locking plate group and 8% in IM nail fixation group at 12 months). The economic evaluation showed that IM nail fixation provided a slightly higher quality of life in the 12 months after injury and at lower cost and, therefore, it was cost-effective compared with locking plate fixation. The probability of cost-effectiveness for IM nail fixation exceeded 90%, regardless of the value of the cost-effectiveness threshold. Limitations: As wound dressings after surgery are clearly visible, it was not possible to blind the patients to their treatment allocation. This evidence does not apply to intra-articular (pilon) fractures of the distal tibia. Conclusions: Among adults with an acute fracture of the distal tibia who were randomised to IM nail fixation or locking plate fixation, there were similar disability ratings at 6 months. However, recovery across all outcomes was faster in the IM nail fixation group and costs were lower. Future work: The potential benefit of IM nail fixation in several other fractures requires investigation. Research is also required into the role of adjuvant treatment and different rehabilitation strategies to accelerate recovery following a fracture of the tibia and other long-bone fractures in the lower limb. The patients in this trial will remain in longer-term follow-up. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99771224 and UKCRN 13761. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.https://doi.org/10.3310/hta22250