INFIX versus plating for pelvic fractures with disruption of the symphysis pubis

Purpose The purpose of this study is to compare INFIX to plating in the treatment of unstable pelvic ring injuries with disruption of the symphysis. Methods Twenty-four patients treated with INFIX were compared to 28 patients fixed by plating. All patients had anterior and posterior fixation. Injuries were classified using the Young and Burgess and AO/OTA classification systems. Reductions of the pelvic ring were assessed using the pelvic deformity index (PDI) and symphyseal widening. Patients were contacted to get functional outcomes using the Majeed scoring system and complications were tabulated . Results INFIX was inferior to plating at reducing symphyseal widening (INFIX 10.72 +/- 5.0 Plates 6.97 +/- 3.39 P = 0.012) but similar in reducing the pelvic deformity index. (INFIX 0.0221 +/- .015 Plates 0.0190 +/- .0105 P = 0 .38). Majeed scores were similar 83.95 +/- 15.2 (median 89, range 51-100) for INFIX and 77.67 +/- 16.7 (median 79, range 54-100) for plating. Complications included infection (1 (4%) INFIX , 4 (14%) plates), improper hardware placement or failure (2 (8%) INFIX, 3 (11%) plates), and heterotopic ossification (11 (46%) INFIX, 16 (57.1%) plates). Infection in the plated patients was related to urological injury in 3/4 cases. Conclusions Plating provides better reduction of the pubic symphysis and requires only one surgery. Outcomes scores were similar. INFIX may be preferable in obese patients, young women of childbearing age or those with urological injury.