Evidence Hub

Suprapatellar Nailing With Condylar Screw Support in Complex Proximal Tibia Fractures: Technical Experience from a Case Series

R. S. Boobathi Raja, A. Ramaswamy, S. Sivamurugan

Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports, 2026

10 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: Complex intra-articular proximal tibia fractures (Schatzker types V and VI) are difficult to manage due to articular involvement, malalignment, and soft-tissue compromise. Conventional plating techniques carry risks of infection and soft-tissue morbidity. Suprapatellar intramedullary nailing (IMN), combined with condylar screws, offers a minimally invasive option with potential biomechanical and clinical advantages. Materials and Methods: A prospective case series was conducted at a tertiary trauma center in Chennai, India, including 10 consecutive adults with Schatzker type V (n = 6) and VI (n = 4) fractures. All patients underwent Suprapatellar IMN in the semi-extended position, reinforced with two lateral-to-medial condylar screws. Patients were followed for 12 months. Radiological union, fracture alignment, and complications were documented. Functional recovery was assessed using the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) and knee range of motion (ROM). Results: The mean patient age was 46.9 years (range 29–73), with 8 males and 2 females. The mean operative time was 104.3 ± 14.2 min. All fractures united radiologically at a mean of 14.3 ± 1.8 weeks. At 12 months, the mean LEFS score was 66.6 ± 7.5; 70% of patients achieved minimal limitation (LEFS ≥64). The mean knee ROM was 125° ± 7.8°. No cases of infection, non-union, implant failure, or neurovascular injury were recorded. Conclusion: Suprapatellar IMN supplemented with condylar screws appears…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 10 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free