Background and objectiveIntramedullary nailing can be considered the current gold standard for the treatment of diaphyseal tibial fractures. Nailing ensures good fracture stability, protection against malalignment, and quick mobilization. The suprapatellar (SP) approach of tibial nailing in the semi-extended position has recently been recommended as a safe and effective surgical technique; it has been gaining significant attention in the orthopedic literature, with fewer complications and reoperations. The approach has been shown to facilitate a reduction in fractures around the knee joint in the semi-extended position, and the extended position of the lower leg allows for easier fluoroscopic imaging. In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes between SP and infrapatellar (IP) approaches of intramedullary nailing in patients with extra-articular tibial fractures.MethodA randomized control trial was conducted over a period of 1.5 years at our tertiary care hospital after obtaining approval from its institutional ethics committee. A total of 60 patients with extra-articular tibial fractures were included in the study, with 30 patients each in the SP nailing group and the IP nailing group, based on randomized sampling and with the help of radiological exposure in SP and IP nailing as per a previous study. The groups were then compared in terms of KUJALA patellofemoral knee score, operative time, radiation exposure, and time of union.ResultsWhen comparing both groups, those treated with the SP approach had better outcomes, including reduced radiation exposure, less pain, decreased operative time, better KUJALA patellofemoral knee score, and faster union.ConclusionBased on our findings of the comparison between SP and IP nailing approaches of extra-articular tibial fractures, the former leads to better and safer outcomes than the latter.