About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Home Print this page Email this page Users Online: 911
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 142-147

Comparative study of fixation of proximal tibial fractures by nonlocking buttress versus locking compression plate

1 Department of Orthopedics, IMSR Medical College, Mayani, Satara, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Orthopedics, Burdwan Medical College and Hospital, Burdwan, West Bengal, India
3 Department of Physiology, Burdwan Medical College and Hospital, Burdwan, West Bengal, India
4 Department of Pathology, Burdwan Medical College and Hospital, Burdwan, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Arunima Chaudhuri
Krishnasayar South, Borehat, Burdwan - 713 102, West Bengal
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1319-6308.156345

Rights and Permissions

Background: Management of tibial plate fracture represents a challenging problem in developing countries. Aims: To compare the results of treatment of tibial plateau fractures with conventional nonlocking buttress plates (BP group) and locking compression plates (LCPs). Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 30 patients with intra-articular closed fractures of the proximal tibia who were alternately assigned to two different treatment protocol, conventional nonlocking BP group or locking plates (LP group). Results : Schatzker Type II fracture was found to be the commonest fracture type with 13 patients. Only lateral plating was done in 24 patients, and dual plating was done in 6 patients. In 8 patients, corticocancellous bone graft were used. On follow-up complications like superficial skin necrosis (two cases), infection (two cases), varus collapse (three cases) developed. Sixty percent in LCP group, 66.6% in buttress group fractures clinically united in the time period of 7-9 weeks and 73.3% in LCP group and 80% in buttress group radiological union occurred in a period of 12-15 weeks. The results were graded in accordance with Poul S. Rasmussen's grading system. During the follow-up, 73.3% in LCP group and 66.6% in buttress group had no pain after clinical union. 66.6% patients in LCP group and 73.3% in buttress group could perform normal walking. About 86.6%in each group had no lack of extension. Nine patients (60%) in LCP group and 10 patients (66.6%) had flexion of up to at least 140°. About 86.6% in LCP group and 80% in buttress group had a stable joint in extension. Conclusion: Considering its high cost, LP group should only be used, where it is more advantageous than conventional plate.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded230    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal