Tibial plateau fracture management: arthroscopically-assisted versus ORIF procedure - clinical and radiological comparison

Introduction: Tibial plateau fractures are articular injuries that may influence final functional outcome of the knee. Although these fractures comprise only 1% of all fractures, the fracture pattern is usually complex and requires anatomical reduction and absolutely stable fixation to achieve satisfactory results. The development of knee osteoarthritis is a common late complication and it can be strongly influenced by additional, underestimated cartilage defects, and meniscal and ligament tears. Materials and methods: Between January 2012 and February 2015, a total of 78 patients with tibial plateau fractures (Schatzker type I-III) were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups: one group was treated with arthroscopically-assisted reduction and internal fixation (ARIF) and the other with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). The final number of patients was 75; 40 in the ARIF group and 35 in the ORIF group. Radiography and computed tomography were used to assess fracture pattern. An immediate postoperative radiographwas performed, and then repeated at 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Demographic data (age and sex), additional intraarticular injuries, hospital stay and complications were noted, and clinical and radiological Rasmunssen score at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery were evaluated. Results: Additional intraarticular lesions were found in 27 patients; 20 in the ARIF group and 7 in the ORIF group (p = 0.06). There was a statistically significant difference in average duration of hospital stay: 3.10 +/- 0.63 days for the ARIF group and 5.51 +/- 1.66 days for the ORIF group (p = 0.0001). All fractures healed within 3 months following surgery. The overall complication rate was 12%. There was no statistically significant difference in complication rate between the two groups (p = 0.63). Clinical and radiological scores were excellent in most patients in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference in average clinical and radiological Rasmunssen scores between the two groups. Conclusions: Both ARIF and ORIF can provide equally good results; however, ARIF seems to offer a more precise evaluation and treatment of associated intraarticular lesions and to reduce the duration of hospital stay. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.