2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0278-2391(00)80010-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Open treatment of condylar process fractures: assessment of adequacy of repositioning and maintenance of stability

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

3
40
0
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 92 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
3
40
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…5,7,12 The authors used it in 11 patients with good functional results. Other authors 11 propose the use of a more rigid plate, possibly compressive, such as a 5-hole or 6-hole zygomatic dynamic compression plate fixed with bi-cortical screws.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5,7,12 The authors used it in 11 patients with good functional results. Other authors 11 propose the use of a more rigid plate, possibly compressive, such as a 5-hole or 6-hole zygomatic dynamic compression plate fixed with bi-cortical screws.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This leads to screw loosening and resorption [21][22][23][24][25]. Another possible reason for resorption of screw holes may be due to the development of the osteolytic changes due to increased intraosseous pressure caused by liquid polymer debris of resorbable materials retained within the channel.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the posterior border is completely exposed, allowing one to assess the mediolateral positioning of the condylar process. Anatomic reduction may be obtained using other surgical approaches, but the retromandibular approach also makes the plate and screw fixation easier [14]. This approach is associated with low incidence of facial nerve damage as experienced by Hyde N [2].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Retromandibular approach can be combined with preauricular approach to improve access to high condylar neck [15]. In one patient we had to combine the two approaches as there was medially displaced high condylar fracture and retromandibular approach alone was not sufficient to provide adequate access and visibility for reduction and fixation [14].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%