A randomised controlled trial comparing fixation of mandibular angle fractures with a single miniplate placed either transbuccally and intra-orally, or intra-orally alone

Sugar, Adrian; Gibbons, Ann; Patton, D W; Silvester, K.C.; Hodder, S.C.; Gray, Mary Ann; Snooks, Helen; Watkins, Alan

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2008.11.001

Cited by 57 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But in the study of Sugar et al [3] mean length of surgery in transbuccal group was 64.9 min and 59.6 min in the intraoral group. The inter incisal opening or mouth opening was measured on the first post operative day to sixth week.…”

Section: Group IImentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The transbuccal instrument system comprising of transbuccal guide, mountable retractor, drill sleeves, drill guide and 2 mm diameter drill bit were used. Access was gained to the fracture site and stability was established by reduction of fractured segment by intraoperative intermaxillary fixation [3] (Figs. 3, 4).…”

Section: Transbuccal Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…House and Brackmann classification was followed for demarcating the type of nerve injury in patients with extraoral surgical approach. This was carried out accounting the time period from date of surgery (nerve injury), and age factor as related to the progress of recovery and regeneration after nerve injury [3,[8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Extraoral Submandibular Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of Management of Mandibular Angle Fractures by Three Approaches

Sudhakar

Gaddipati

Dhanala

et al. 2015

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives Various methods have been reported in the literature for treating mandibular angle fractures comparing extra oral, intra oral and transbuccal approaches for achieving the goals of restoration of anatomic form, maintenance of segment position and bony union. Materials and Methods This study was conducted to assess the simple and effective surgical approach in treating mandibular angle fractures and the outcome by means of three approaches i.e. intra oral, transbuccal and extra oral approaches. Results/Conclusion A total of 45 patients with mandibular angle fracture were divided into three groups. Group Iintra oral approach-15 patients, Group II-transbuccal with intraoral approach-15 patients, Group III-extra oral approach-15 patients. The results of our study found intraoral approach to be much better because it is simple, precise, duration is short, and post operative complications are less with minimal morbidity and pain.

show abstract

Section: Group IImentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Transbuccal Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Extraoral Submandibular Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Management of Mandibular Angle Fractures by Three Approaches

Sudhakar

Gaddipati

Dhanala

et al. 2015

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also facilitates the placement of plate in neutral mid point area of mandible [7]. It offers advantages of intraoral route with minimal scar and injury to nerve.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Review of Treatment of 80 Mandibular Angle Fracture Fixation with Miniplates Using Three Different Techniques

Kumar

Prabhakar

Rao

et al. 2011

Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard treatment of mandibular angle fracture with miniplates according to recommendations of Champy et al. (1976) consists of fixation with one miniplate at superior border of mandible ventral to external oblique line. In certain constellations, second miniplate at lower border may provide additional stability. In this retrospective study 80 patients with mandibular angle fracture were divided into 3 sub-groups reported at DIRDS Faridkot were treated by intraoral, extraoral and combined intraoral and transbuccal approach. There was no significant difference in complication rates encountered with these techniques. Decision regarding treatment approaches for open reduction of mandible fracture often relates to surgeon's experience and training. In some cases, choice is affected by availability of equipment. More difficult cases involving endentulous atrophic mandible or comminution should be considered for extraoral approach. Intraoral open reduction and fixation was used for non-comminuted and non-complicated fractures. The combined transbuccal/ Intraoral procedure is now preferred method because of ease of use and facilitation of placement of plate in neutral mid point area of mandible.

show abstract

“…However, this transbuccal incision carries a small risk of damage to adjacent nerves, vessels, and the parotid gland, although the review of literature and the experience of this study show that this is a very rare to negligible complication. [17][18][19] Comminuted mandibular fractures tend to have a worse outcome with a prolonged recovery time, and postoperative inflammatory complications are common. 20,21 The intraoral approach is another risk factor for increasing the inflammatory complication rate, since the fracture will become exposed to oral bacteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcome of Comminuted Mandibular Fracture Repair Using an Intraoral Approach for Osteosynthesis

Schenkel

Obwegeser

Zemann

et al. 2014

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE: Traditionally, the treatment of comminuted mandibular fractures involves both closed and open reduction. However, modern treatment principles increasingly tend toward open reduction and internal fixation to shorten oro-functional rehabilitation. Although this method increasingly gained popularity to date, a controversy regarding the extraoral versus the intraoral surgical approach still exists. The current study aimed to objectively evaluate the outcome of comminuted mandibular fracture treatment involving open reduction and internal fixation using an intraoral approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients treated at the Department of Cranio-Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery, University Hospital of Zurich, between 2005 and 2012 were included. Demographic, presurgical, perisurgical, and postsurgical data were tabulated and statistically evaluated using the test and the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Forty-five patients could be included. Excellent postoperative results were seen in 84% (38 patients) of the total cohort. Postoperative complications were seen in 16% (7 patients). These 7 patients had the following complications: wound dehiscence (7% [n = 3]), osteomyelitis (7% [n = 3]), abscess development (4% [n = 2]), bone necrosis (2% [n = 1]), and severe nonocclusion (2% [n = 1]). CONCLUSION: Present data showed that the intraoral approach for open reduction and internal fixation in comminuted mandibular fractures represents a comparable surgical technique regarding fracture repositioning and occlusal rehabilitation. Considerably, the risk of concomitant neurovascular damage or even facial scarring, as demonstrated in the extraoral approach, can be neglected by using this technique. Nevertheless, each case has to be judged on its own accord as to which technique can best treat the underlying fracture.

show abstract

A randomised controlled trial comparing fixation of mandibular angle fractures with a single miniplate placed either transbuccally and intra-orally, or intra-orally alone

Cited by 57 publications

References 6 publications

Comparison of Management of Mandibular Angle Fractures by Three Approaches

Comparison of Management of Mandibular Angle Fractures by Three Approaches

A Comparative Review of Treatment of 80 Mandibular Angle Fracture Fixation with Miniplates Using Three Different Techniques

Outcome of Comminuted Mandibular Fracture Repair Using an Intraoral Approach for Osteosynthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About