Can a less invasive surgery speed up pilon fracture healing?

NCT ID NCT03367169

First seen Aug 05, 2026 · Last updated Aug 06, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This trial compares two surgical techniques for treating pilon fractures—a serious type of ankle fracture. One method uses a minimally invasive approach with a plate, while the other uses traditional open reduction and internal fixation. The study will measure how quickly the wound heals, how long bandages are needed, and overall foot and ankle function. Adults with certain types of pilon fractures may participate, and the goal is to see which technique offers better recovery and safety.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
minimally invasive surgical technique (percutaneous plating) compared with open reduction and internal fixation
What this could lead to
If minimally invasive surgery proves better, it could lead to faster recovery and fewer wound complications for people with pilon fractures.
What could go wrong
This is a small trial, and results may not apply to all fracture types. Both surgeries carry risks like infection or nerve damage, and the less invasive approach might not always be feasible.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for BONE are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

bone fracture Leg Injuries

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • CHU Clermont-Ferrand

    Clermont-Ferrand, 63003, France

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.