Skip to main content

Orthopaedic Nails Versus Orthopaedic Plates: An Evolutionary Tale for Dominance and Relevance

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Orthopaedic Trauma Implantology

Abstract

Nails are intramedullary devices originally invented to fix diaphyseal fractures of long bones of the lower limb. Plates were invented as a surface implant to deal with diaphyseal fractures of bones in the upper limb. Gradually, both of these implants evolved to tackle more complex fractures beyond the diaphysis as well as other bones which were previously not amenable to internal fixation.

In this chapter, we will overview this journey from the early implants to the current status quo through the twists and turns in their design advancement as well as how the implants were able to extend their indications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 1,599.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,599.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Richardson ML, Kilcoyne RF, Mayo KA, Lamont JG, Hastrup W. Radiographic evaluation of modern orthopedic fixation devices. Radiographics. 1987;7(4):685–701. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.7.4.3329363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosa N, Marta M, Vaz M, Tavares SMO, Simoes R, Magalhães FD, Marques AT. Intramedullary nailing biomechanics: evolution and challenges. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2019;233(3):295–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954411919827044. PMID: 30887900.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kumar P, Neradi D, Kansal R, Aggarwal S, Kumar V, Dhillon MS. Greater trochanteric versus piriformis fossa entry nails for femur shaft fractures: resolving the controversy. Injury. 2019;50(10):1715–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2019.07.011. Epub 2019 Jul 14. PMID: 31358301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Li AB, Zhang WJ, Guo WJ, Wang XH, Jin HM, Zhao YM. Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of femoral fractures: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(29):e4248. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000004248. PMID: 27442651; PMCID: PMC5265768.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bell CS, Jackson RW. What’s new in orthopaedic surgery? A review of major breakthroughs and advances in orthopaedics. Baylor Univ Med Center Proc. 1999;12(2):121–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.1999.11930159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mantripragada VP, Lecka-Czernik B, Ebraheim NA, Jayasuriya AC. An overview of recent advances in designing orthopedic and craniofacial implants. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2013;101(11):3349–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Uhthoff HK, Poitras P, Backman DS. Internal plate fixation of fractures: short history and recent developments. J Orthop Sci. 2006;11(2):118–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-005-0984-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Augat P, von Rüden C. Evolution of fracture treatment with bone plates. Injury. 2018;49(Suppl 1):S2–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(18)30294-8. PMID: 29929687.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Black EM, Antoci V, Lee JT, Weaver MJ, Johnson AH, Susarla SM, Kwon JY. Role of preoperative computed tomography scans in operative planning for malleolar ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34(5):697–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071100713475355. Epub 2013 Feb 4. PMID: 23637238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. O’Toole RV, Cox G, Shanmuganathan K, Castillo RC, Turen CH, Sciadini MF, Nascone JW. Evaluation of computed tomography for determining the diagnosis of acetabular fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2010;24(5):284–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181c83bc0. PMID: 20418733.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Başcı O, Karakaşlı A, Kumtepe E, Güran O, Havıtçıoğlu H. Combination of anatomical locking plate and retrograde intramedullary nail in distal femoral fractures: comparison of mechanical stability. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi. 2015;26(1):21–6. https://doi.org/10.5606/ehc.2015.06. PMID: 25741916.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arindam Banerjee .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Section Editor information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Banerjee, A., Shanmugasundaram, S., Dasgupta, S. (2023). Orthopaedic Nails Versus Orthopaedic Plates: An Evolutionary Tale for Dominance and Relevance. In: Banerjee, A., Biberthaler, P., Shanmugasundaram, S. (eds) Handbook of Orthopaedic Trauma Implantology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7540-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7540-0_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-7539-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-7540-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics