Purpose: To evaluate and compare the outcome between interlocking IM nailing and LCP fixation in the treatment of distal metaphyseal tibial fracture. Materials and Methods: From January 2000 to December 2007, 17 patient were treated by interlocking IM nail and 13 patient were treated by LCP fixation for distal metaphyseal tibial fracture. Results: According to AO classification, there were 2 type A1 fracture (12%), 6 type A2 fracture (36%), 3 type A3 fracture (18%), 4 type B1 fracture (24%), 1 type B3 fracture (6%), 1 type C1 fracture (6%) in interlocking IM nailing group and 1 type A2 fracture (7.7%), 2 type A3 fracture (15.4%), 3 type B1 fracture (23%), 3 type B2 fracture (23%), 3 type C1 fracture (23%), 1 type C2 fracture (7.7%) in LCP fixation group. The clinical functional outcome (according to AOFAS score) is 75.6 point in IM nailing group and 81.5 point in LCP fixation group. In IM nailing group, 65% of patient showed satisfactory result and In LCP fixation group, 77% of patient showed satisfactory result. Conclusion: There is no difference on clinical results between IM nailing and MIPPO (minimal invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis) group in the treatment of distal tibia fracture. But MIPPO group have higher subjective satisfactory score and less complication rate. The weakness of our study is a small case number and limited follow-up and we believe a better designed prospective study will be needed.