Evaluation of 3 and 2-point internal fixation in the management of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: Case report

Widodo, Dini Widiarni; Dewi, Dwi Juliana; Ranakusuma, Respati W.; Irawati, Yunia

doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102539

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…19 Widodo et al (2021) compared 2-point and 3-point fixation and found out that 3-point fixation had better outcome in the assessment of enophthalmos, vertical dystopia, malar height, malar projection, and maintaining postoperatively stability. 20 Surgical outcome was evaluated and compared with CT scans in 2- and 3-point fixation in 2 groups and found no significant difference in stability and they concluded that 2-point fixation was as good as 3-point fixation with respect to stability of fractures. 21 This was similar to the observation in the study conducted by Latif et al and found that post operative outcome relatively had the same mean values at 1 week, 3 week, and 6 weeks postoperatively compared with 2-point fixation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective Analysis of Management of Zygomatic Complex Fractures

Kambalimath,

M.V.V.

et al. 2023

The Traumaxilla

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Zygomatic bone and its surrounding bony anatomy are essential for maintaining facial contour—cheek prominence and orbital integrity. Management of the zygomatic complex (ZMC) fractures are important in the maintenance of function and facial integrity. Aim and Objectives To analyze the incidence, aetiology, surgical management, and complications encountered in the treatment of ZMC fractures in our super-specialty hospital, and to compare the number and location of fixation points and surgical access in our patient cohort with the literature. Materials and Method Retrospective analysis of all operative cases (Open Reduction and Internal Fixation) of ZMC fractures over a 3-year period (2017-2021) were reviewed. Craniofacial maxillofacial trauma patient’s medical records were collected and out which only the ZMC fracture cases were reviewed. Only the medical records from the period from 2017 to 2021 were included. The parameters such as etiology, site of the ZMC fracture, type of fracture, associated injuries, clinical findings, treated with conservative or surgical intervention, type of incisions used, number of fixation used, and any complications encountered were reviewed and analyzed. Results Out of 428 cases of craniofacial injury, 96 cases were ZMC fractures, isolated ZMC fractures accounted for 43%, 33% with associated injuries, 13% isolated arch, while 11% accounted isolated infraorbital rim fracture. Most common clinical findings were subconjunctival ecchymosis (71%), flattening of cheek (39%), malocclusion (22%), and so on. Buccal sulcus incision (66%) was mainly used, followed by upper blepharoplasty incision (59%). Depending on degree of displacement of fracture 1-point fixation (8%), 2-point fixation (30%), or 3-point fixation (27%) was performed. About 33% of cases were conservatively managed and followed up on regular intervals. Lymph edema, infra orbital paresthesia, temporary blindness, diplopia, hemianopsia were some of the complications encountered which were managed successfully and followed up. Conclusion ZMC fractures are most commonly occurring midface fractures with variable etiologies. The most common ZMC fracture pattern was tripod type of fracture. Greater portion of the patient were treated with 2-point fixation. Most of the complications were due to the impact and velocity of trauma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retrospective Analysis of Management of Zygomatic Complex Fractures

Kambalimath,

M.V.V.

et al. 2023

The Traumaxilla

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there are several reasons why postoperative infection rates should be increased, it has been seen that systemic antibiotics taken after surgery, together with good hygiene practices and antibacterial mouthwash, reduce the risk of infection. [ 20 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of zygomatico maxillary complex fractures among Indian patients

Makkad¹

2023

Bioinformation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zygomatic bone fractures should be effectively diagnosed and treated because they affect how the face is shaped for both aesthetically and functional reasons. It is possible to compare different surgical techniques and their comorbidities objectively through using outcome quantitative assessments, which call for a treatment programme and long-term follow-up. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of two procedures and the effectiveness of the zygomatic bone following open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) employing two-point fixation and ORIF employing three-point fixation. Two groups of twenty patients each were randomly assigned to. Twenty patients in Group A had ORIF treatment using two-point miniplate fixation technique, and twenty patients in Group B received three-point miniplate fixation treatment. Differences between the two categories were ascertained after they had been evaluated in terms of their advantages and disadvantages. We discovered that the two-point fixation group had the fewest facial complications and neurological side effects. At 1 month follow up, Group B's average radiological evaluation score was 2.47ą 0.30, and then at 6 months follow up, it was found out to be 1.87ą0.47. A significant statistical distinction between the average radiological evaluations was observed in study participants of Group A at follow up done after one month and six months of procedure. Student's paired t- statistical test was utilized from this statistical analysis. (t = 6.54, P < 0.01). On carrying out follow up after one month of surgery, average neurological assessment score in study participants of group A was found out to be 0.22ą 0.42, and then at 6 months follow up, it was 0.61ą0.63. The average neurological evaluation score in study participants of Group A on carrying out follow up after one month of surgical procedure and and after six months of surgical procedure months showed a significant statistical distinction when utilizing Student's paired t- statistical test (t = 2.51, P = 0.021).It was determined that the best available rehabilitation for the treatment of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures is open reduction and internal fixation employing two-point fixation by miniplates.

show abstract

“…[ 17 ] suggested that primary location for fixation should be in vertical plane to resist the vertical displacing force either at the frontozygomatic suture or the zygomatic buttress. [ 18 19 20 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, rigid plate-and-screw fixation at the zygomaticomaxillary buttress in children with deciduous dentition appears to be safe and effective when performed. [ 20 ] Widodo et al . suggest that ultrasound-guided one-point fixation on the zygomaticomaxillary buttress provides accurate reduction on ZMC fractures without the separation of the frontal process of the zygomatic bone fracture.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Two-Point versus Three-Point Fixation in the Management of Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fractures

Gawande¹,

Lambade²,

Bande³

et al. 2021

Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The zygoma plays an important role in the facial contour for both cosmetic and functional reasons; therefore, zygomatic bone injuries should be properly diagnosed and adequately treated. Comparison of various surgical approaches and their complications can only be done objectively using outcome measurements that require a protocol for management and long-term follow-up. The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of zygomatic bone after treatment with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) using two-point fixation and ORIF using three-point fixation and compare the outcome of two procedures. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients were randomly divided equally into two groups. In Group A, ten patients were treated by ORIF using two-point fixation by miniplates and in Group B, ten patients were treated by ORIF using three-point fixation by miniplates. They were evaluated with their advantages and disadvantages and the difference between the two groups was observed. Results: We found that postoperative facial and neurological complications are minimum in two-point fixation group. Based on this study, open reduction and internal fixation using two-point fixation by miniplates is sufficient and the best available treatment of choice for the management of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. Discussion: Alignment of the fracture at three points and fixation at two stable points provide the most accurate and satisfactory postoperative results. Two-point interosseous fixation at the “buttress” fracture and the frontozygomatic (FZ) fracture is suitable for routine surgery. The results of these studies confirm with the present study that two-point fixation provided better stability in patients with clinical and radiological evidence of fracture in FZ and zygomaticomaxillary buttress area.

show abstract

Evaluation of 3 and 2-point internal fixation in the management of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures: Case report

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Retrospective Analysis of Management of Zygomatic Complex Fractures

Retrospective Analysis of Management of Zygomatic Complex Fractures

Management of zygomatico maxillary complex fractures among Indian patients

Two-Point versus Three-Point Fixation in the Management of Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fractures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About