A comparison of percutaneous reduction and screw fixation versus open reduction and plate fixation of traumatic symphysis pubis diastasis.

Objective: Plate fixation, the conventional treatment for traumatic symphysis pubis diastasis, carries the risk of extensive exposure, blood loss and postoperative infections. Percutaneous screw fixation is a minimally invasive treatment. The goal of the present study was to compare the outcome of plate fixation and percutaneous screw technique in the treatment of traumatic pubic symphysis diastasis.

Methods: Ninety patients with traumatic symphysis pubis diastasis were treated from January 2003 to December 2009 at two level 1 regional trauma centers. The mean time of follow-up was 21 months (18 to 26). Forty-five patients were treated by percutaneous screw fixation. Forty-five patients were treated by plate and screws fixation. The demographic, distribution of fracture patterns, blood loss, incision length, fixation failure, malunion, revision surgery and functional scores were compared.

Results: Seven cases were lost during follow-up. Demographics (age and gender), fracture classification and Injury Severity Score were comparable in the two groups (P > 0.05). Blood loss and extensive exposure were much less in screw group (P < 0.01). Patients in screw group achieved better functional performance (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences favoring plate fixation in reduction quality (P = 0.32), implant failure (P = 0.39), malunion (P = 0.15), revision surgery rates (P = 0.27), percentage of impotence in the male patients (P = 0.2) and implant removal time (P = 0.12) between the two groups.

Conclusions: Our results indicate that besides lower rate of iatrogenic injuries and better functional outcome, percutaneous screw fixation of the pubic symphysis is as strong as plate fixation.