A comparison between ilioinguinal and modified Stoppa approach in anterior column acetabular fractures

Pelvis fractures are among the most difficult fractures to manage and treat for Orthopedic surgeons. Anatomic reduction is the main goal to reach in the acetabular fractures’ treatment. The following study compares clinical outcomes and complications of Ilioinguinal versus modified Stoppa approach in Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) of anterior column acetabulum fractures. A comparative analysis on 90 patients undergoing ORIF on acetabular fracture has been performed. Patients have been divided into two groups. The first group was treated by Ilioinguinal approach (n = 48), the second group by modified Stoppa approach (n = 42). The following parameters have been compareted: quality of fragment reduction; operative time; peri‑ and post-operative blood loss; complications; clinical and radiographic outcomes. The modified Stoppa approach has shown a shorter mean operative time (146 min vs 175 min), fewer complications (14/48 vs 6/42), less blood loss both in the perio-operative phase (0.8 Hb pt vs 1.3 Hb pt) than in postoperative one (1.1 Hb pt vs 1.5 Hb pt), a lower rate of nerve, infections and critical complications. On the other hand, the ilioinguinal approach has showed better results in terms of quality of fracture reduction (43/48 patiens with anatomical or near anatomical reduction vs. 37/42). No significant differences concerning vascular lesions, clinical and functional outcomes have been found between the two groups. The modified Stoppa approach results in shorter operative time, less intra-operative blood loss and fewer complications than the ilioinguinal one. Greater anatomic reduction is achieved by Ilioinguinal approach; however, this does not necessarily translate into better clinical and functional outcomes which, overall, are comparable in the two analysed approaches. In conclusion, the modified Stoppa approach is deemed to be a better alternative in treating these fractures.