A Comparative Analysis of Infection Rates in Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Versus Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis for Closed Femur and Tibia Fractures (Code-T0229)

Introduction: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a major concern in orthopedic trauma surgeries, impacting patient recovery and overall clinical outcomes. Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) and Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPO) are commonly employed techniques for treating closed femur and tibia fractures. While ORIF provides direct fracture visualization, it involves extensive soft tissue dissection, potentially increasing infection risks. In contrast, MIPO minimizes tissue disruption, which may contribute to lower infection rates.

Objectives: To compare rate of infection in open reduction and internal fixation and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in closed femur and tibia fractures.

Methods: A prospective study will be conducted on 30 patients, with 15 undergoing ORIF and 15 receiving MIPO. Infection rates will be assessed using the ASEPSIS wound scoring system at different postoperative intervals. Additional factors, including patient demographics, fracture site, anesthesia type, and postoperative complications, will be analyzed.

Results: The study is expected to demonstrate whether MIPO leads to lower infection rates and improved wound healing compared to ORIF. Existing literature suggests that MIPO, due to its minimally invasive approach, may reduce soft tissue trauma and infection risk.

Conclusion: By evaluating infection rates and overall surgical outcomes, this study will help determine the preferred surgical approach for managing closed femur and tibia fractures, aiding in the development of improved treatment strategies.

Keywords: ORIF, MIPO, Closed fractures, Infection rate, Surgical site infection, ASEPSIS score