Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Retrograde intramedullary nailing reduces operative time and infection rates for distal femur fracturesNailing offers faster healing and lower infection for femur fractures

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that RIN offers faster surgical times and lower infection rates but may increase knee pain and reduce flexion.

This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluated the comparative outcomes of retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIN) versus locked plate fixation for adult patients with distal femur fractures. The analysis included 1105 patients, with 555 in the RIN group and 550 in the PLATE group.

Meta-analyzed results showed that RIN significantly reduced operative duration by a mean difference of -13.75 minutes (95% CI -22.89 to -4.62; p = 0.003). Additionally, fracture union was faster with RIN (MD -3.01 weeks; 95% CI -4.33 to -1.69; p < 0.001), and infection rates were lower in the RIN group (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.98; p = 0.042).

Conversely, patients undergoing RIN reported higher levels of knee pain (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.14-2.48; p = 0.009) and less knee flexion (MD 4.04°; 95% CI 0.51-7.58; p = 0.025). No significant differences were observed regarding non-union, delayed union, malalignment, implant failure, blood loss, re-operation, or functional scores. Clinicians should weigh the benefits of faster surgical procedures and lower infection rates against the potential for increased pain and reduced range of motion in patients undergoing intramedullary nailing.

How this fits prior evidence

This meta-analysis addresses a gap in comparative surgical techniques for distal femur fractures by evaluating specific outcomes like operative duration, union time, and infection rates. It complements prior evidence showing that early surgery does not significantly impact 30-day mortality in older adults with distal femur fractures by providing more granular data on the trade-offs between nailing and plate fixation.

When a person breaks their femur, the bone near the knee, surgery is often necessary to stabilize the fracture. Doctors have long debated which method works best: using an internal nail or a metal plate. A large review of clinical trials involving over 1,100 patients compared these two common surgical techniques.

The study found that patients who received intramedullary nailing (a rod placed inside the bone) had significantly shorter surgery times and reached bone union—the point where the bone has healed together—about three weeks faster than those who received plate fixation. Additionally, the nailing method showed a lower risk of infection.

However, there is a trade-off regarding comfort and movement. Patients who received the nail reported higher levels of knee pain and had slightly less range of motion when bending their knee compared to those with plates. Other factors like blood loss and overall functional scores did not show significant differences between the two methods.

What this means for you:
Nailing leads to faster healing and fewer infections, but may cause more knee pain than plate fixation.

Common questions

How much faster does the bone heal with nailing?

Patients who received intramedullary nailing saw their bones join together about 3.01 weeks faster than those who had a plate put in place.

Are there any risks of infection with these methods?

The study found that the risk of infection was lower for patients who received intramedullary nailing compared to those who received plate fixation.

Does the type of surgery affect knee pain or movement?

Patients who had the nail procedure reported higher levels of knee pain and had slightly less knee flexion, which is the ability to bend the knee joint.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 1,105
EvidenceLevel 1
Follow-up0.7 mo
PublishedJul 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: The optimal fixation method for distal femur fractures remains contentious. Retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIN) and locking plate fixation (PLATE) are the two principal surgical options, yet their comparative effectiveness has not been definitively established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively compare the operative, radiological, and functional outcomes of RIN versus PLATE for distal femur fractures exclusively from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science was performed from inception to December 2025. Only RCTs directly comparing RIN with PLATE for distal femur fractures in adult patients were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed for 11 outcomes. Heterogeneity was quantified using I² statistics and prediction intervals. Subgroup analyses were conducted by fracture complexity, open fracture status, and follow-up duration. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs comprising 1105 patients (555 RIN, 550 PLATE) were included. RIN demonstrated significantly shorter operative duration (mean difference (MD) -13.75 min; 95% confidence interval (CI) -22.89 to -4.62; p = 0.003), faster fracture union time (MD -3.01 weeks; 95% CI -4.33 to -1.69; p < 0.001), and lower infection rates (risk ratio (RR) 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.98; p = 0.042). However, RIN was associated with significantly more knee pain (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.14-2.48; p = 0.009) and less knee flexion (MD 4.04° favouring PLATE; 95% CI 0.51-7.58; p = 0.025). No significant differences were observed for non-union, delayed union, malalignment, implant failure, blood loss, re-operation, or functional scores. CONCLUSION: RIN offers shorter operative duration, faster fracture union, and lower infection rates compared with plate fixation for distal femur fractures. However nailing causes significantly increased incidence of knee pain and slightly reduced knee flexion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.