ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2025
Fixation of Distal Fibula Fractures Associated with Extra-articular Distal One-third Tibia Fractures - Is It Necessary?
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Fractures involving the distal third of both bone leg are one of the common long bone fractures with significant concern owing to the amount of soft-tissue damage incurred and poor prognosis with respect to fracture fixation. Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate whether fibula fixation is necessary along with internal fixation of extra-articular distal tibia fractures by comparing the clinico-radiological and functional outcome of patients of extra-articular distal third tibia fractures with fibula "fixed" and fibula "not fixed" group. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study with a sample size of 30 patients was conducted in Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research between March 2023 and May 2024. Fibula fixation was done in one group, and the fibula was not fixed in the control group. Research methodology includes radiological evaluation for coronal and sagittal plane malalignment, Radiographic Union Score for Tibial fractures (RUST) scoring, and clinically, rotational malalignment and presence of post-operative infection. All cases were followed up for a minimum duration of 6 months to assess union of tibia fractures in both groups. Results: Tibial bone union rate was better in the fibula not fixed (control) group compared to the fibula fixed group (P = 0.032), confirmed by the RUST scoring (P = 0.047), which was statistically significant. Conclusion: There was no significant improvement with additional fibula fixation in the healing of distal tibia fractures, but rather causes greater morbidity in terms of wound infections and delayed healing of the tibia. This clearly demonstrates that fibula fixation in extra-articular distal tibia fractures when the fracture does not affect the syndesmosis or ankle mortise is not necessary, and is associated with a higher risk of tibial non-union.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.