Intraoral external oblique ridge compared with transbuccal lateral cortical plate fixation for the treatment of fractures of the mandibular angle: prospective randomised trial

Infection Rates of an Intraoral Versus Extraoral Approach to Mandibular Fracture Repairs are Equal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This study investigates whether the intraoral approach to mandibular open reduction and internal fixation, through exposure to the oral cavity's microbiome, results in higher infection rates compared to the extraoral approach, thus addressing a critical public health concern, potentially offering an opportunity to reduce health-care costs, and aiming to guide effective clinical practice.

METHODS

In this systematic review with meta-analyses, a review of the literature was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Embase and PubMed for articles published between 1989 and 2023. Inclusion criteria targeted studies on open reduction and internal fixation mandibular fractures comparing intraoral and extraoral approaches and reporting infection rates. Exclusion criteria eliminated non-English articles, case reports, and studies with insufficient approach-specific data. The primary outcome was the postoperative infection rate, with surgical approach as the predictor. Covariates such as age, sex, diabetes, and smoking status were included when reported. Data were analyzed using R software, employing random-effects models due to anticipated heterogeneity (I2 statistics).

RESULTS

From 61 studies, 11 provided direct comparisons involving 1,317 patients-937 intraoral and 380 extraoral. Infection rates were 5.9% for intraoral and 10% for extraoral approaches. Pooled relative risk was 0.94 [95% confidence interval, 0.63, 1.39], suggesting no significant risk difference. Prevalence of infections was estimated at 9% for intraoral and 6.1% for extraoral procedures, with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 84% for intraoral and 56% for extraoral).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis found no significant difference in infection rates between the two approaches. There is opportunity to expand on reporting complication rates comparing the various approaches to mandibular fixation. Until these data are presented, surgeon preference may dictate the operative approach to expose the mandible for reduction and fixation.

Does a Short Period of Maxillomandibular Fixation Decrease Complications in Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Mandibular Angle Fractures?

PURPOSE

A short duration of postoperative maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) has the potential to reduce complications following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of mandibular angle fractures. The purpose of this study was to determine if a short duration of MMF is associated with a reduced rate of postoperative inflammatory complications (POICs) in patients with mandibular angle fractures undergoing ORIF.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study consisting of patients treated with ORIF for mandibular angle fractures from August 1, 2015 to May 31, 2020 at an urban, level 1 trauma center. Patients under the age of 18 years, bilateral angle fractures, those with MMF periods of more than 3 weeks, and those patients without documentation of the duration of MMF were excluded from the study. The primary predictor variable was the use of a short duration (less than 2 weeks) of postoperative MMF. The outcome variable of interest was the presence of POICs. Categorical covariates were compared using Fisher's exact tests, while continuous variables were compared using Wilcox rank-sum tests. Multivariable logistic regression adjustment was also performed.

RESULTS

There were 307 patients included in the study, 84.4% of which were men. The average age was 32.5 years. Patients with a short duration of MMF had a POIC rate of 8.3% compared to 18.2% for no MMF (P = .08). In the adjusted analysis, patients with a short duration of MMF time had a significant decrease in POIC risk compared to no MMF (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.11 to 0.97). Other significant variables in the regression analysis included plating type and noncompliance. Inferior border rigid fixation was associated with decreased POIC risk compared to ladder plates and lateral border plates (aOR 5.8, 95% CI = 1.8 to 18.4 and aOR 5.1, 95% CI = 1.4 to 18.7, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The findings from our study suggest that a short duration of postoperative MMF may reduce POICs following ORIF of mandibular angle fractures.

Periodontal disease as a primary cause of surgical site infection in fractures of the mandible: is smoking a confounding variable?

Fractures of the mandible are common in contemporary oral and maxillofacial practice. Wound infection is the most common complication after open reduction and internal fixation, and the management of these is complex and costly in terms of morbidity to the patient, and in fiscal terms. Whilst numerous epidemiological studies implicate smoking, alcohol, drug use, and adverse behaviour, as well as fracture complexity and diabetes, as important risk factors, the role of periodontal disease is only occasionally mentioned and not formally investigated. The aim of this study therefore was to assess the presence of periodontal disease and its severity according to the 2018 EFP/AAP periodontitis case classification in patients with fractured mandibles who presented to a single level 1 trauma centre, and to look for a possible association with surgical site infection. A total of 305 patients were assessed retrospectively following open reduction and internal fixation via transoral incisions with load-sharing osteosynthesis. The postoperative infection rate was 22.95%. Multivariate and multiple logistic regression revealed that there was a strong association between periodontal staging and postoperative surgical site infection. Crucially, the study predicts that patients with severe periodontal disease (periodontal stage III and IV) are over seven times more likely to develop a wound infection than disease-negative individuals. This has implications for risk adjustment, prognostication, treatment planning, and postoperative care. Surprisingly in this study, cigarette smoking, an established risk factor in the pathogenesis of periodontal disease, did not achieve statistical significance, potentially conflicting with the established literature.

Medial Epicanthoplasty With the Classic and Modified Skin Redraping Method: A Retrospective Case Control Study

ABSTRACT

The skin redraping method for medial epicanthoplasty is characterized by some shortcomings which warrants modification. In this study, clinical data of 193 patients who underwent medial epichanthoplasty by the modified skin redraping technique or the classic skin redraping technique were reviewed retrospectively. The patients underwent operation between May 2018 and June 2020 and were followed up for not less than 6 months. Interepicanthal distance , interpupillary distance, patient satisfaction, and postoperative complications were evaluated. In terms of interepicanthal distance/interpupillary distance ratio (P > 0.05) and satisfaction score (P = 0.759), the modified skin redraping technique and the classic skin redraping technique were similar. In the classic skin redraping group, there were 3 cases of visible scarring in the lower eyelid, corresponding to significantly more cases than in the modified skin redraping group (n = 0, P < 0.001). There were more out-fold cases in the modified skin redraping group (76/90) than in the classic skin redraping group (17/88) (P < 0.001). Utilizing the modified skin redraping medial epicanthoplasty can prevent medial hooding of the upper eyelid, reduce the probability of visible scarring, and produce more out-fold with concurrent double eyelidplasty compared with classic skin redraping epicanthoplasty.Level of evidence: IV.

Mandibular Angle Fractures

Angle fractures are the most common among the mandibular fractures. History and physical examination are crucial in guiding time course and specifics of management. Computed tomography (CT) has become the gold standard for diagnosis of mandible fractures, offering advantages for both surgical planning and assessing dental involvement. Currently the use of a single monocortical plate with the Champy technique for osteosynthesis is used preferentially for noncomminuted fractures of the mandibular angle. Other load-sharing options for plating include strut plates, malleable plates, and geometric or 3D plates. Load-bearing options remain viable for comminuted fractures or other complex circumstances.

Is Screw-Fracture Proximity or Residual Fracture Displacement Correlated to Outcomes After Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Mandibular Angle Fractures?

PURPOSE

Computed tomography (CT) imaging is commonly obtained following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of mandibular fractures but the significance of common findings is unknown. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship of screw-to-fracture proximity and residual fracture displacement to post-operative complications following ORIF of mandibular angle fractures treated with monocortical fixation techniques.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study consisting of all patients with mandibular angle fractures treated with ORIF using monocortical fixation at the lateral surface of the mandible from the dates August 1, 2015 to May 31, 2020. The predictor variables were the distance measurements between the 2 closest screws to the fracture and the fracture line and the amount of residual fracture displacement, both measured on post-operative CT. The primary outcome variable was the presence of postoperative inflammatory complications (POICs). Statistical analysis was performed using logistic regression and Bayesian variable selection to calculate posterior probability of importance for the variables of interest.

RESULTS

Of the 285 patients included in the study, 84.6% were men and the average age was 30.8 years. POICs occurred in 22.1% of the patients. Age, smoking, homelessness, noncompliance and drug use were associated with POICs. However, none of the screw-to-fracture distances were associated with POICs, including linear, dichotomous or polynomial transformations of these variables. Additionally, the residual fracture displacement distances and transformations of these distances were also not associated with POICs.

CONCLUSION

The present study did not find any evidence to suggest that a closer screw-fracture distance or increased residual fracture displacement on postoperative CT imaging increased the risk of POICs for mandibular angle fractures treated with ORIF using monocortical fixation at the lateral border.

Use of antibiotics in traumatic mandibular fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The treatment of traumatic mandibular fractures constitutes a significant part of the oral and maxillofacial trauma service's workload. There are potential variations in how they are managed. Patients are often admitted and given intravenous antibiotics prior to their definitive treatment. The evidence behind this is inconclusive. We performed a systematic review as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance/ PROSPERO Registered (CRD:42020201398) on the use of antibiotics in the management of mandibular fractures. We identified studies using a search algorithm within the OVID Gateway (including MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane Collaborative). Studies analysing the possible impact of prophylactic antibiotics on traumatic mandibular fractures were eligible. The primary outcome was surgical site infection requiring any treatment beyond the normal postoperative protocol. Secondary outcomes included any complication requiring further intervention. From the 16 studies identified (3,285 patients), seven were randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and nine were retrospective observational studies. We have identified significant between-study variation in choice of antibiotic regimen (timing, dosage, duration) and in reporting both primary and secondary outcomes. There was significant between-study heterogeneity (p = 0.02, I² = 69%) and none of the assessed interventions was found to be superior. The evidence behind the use of prophylactic antibiotics in mandibular fractures is weak. A properly designed and powered RCT is needed, in order to standardise practice for the benefit of patients and healthcare systems.

Complications after different methods for fixation of mandibular angle fractures: network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of this review was to compare mandibular angle fracture fixation methods that were evaluated through randomized clinical trials considering postoperative complications. Additionally, different treatment methods were ranked based on their performance. A systematic review was performed based on the Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. The quality of evidence and network meta-analysis were conducted using the GRADE tool and R software, respectively. Four databases were searched, and the papers were selected based on the PICOS strategy. A total of 3584 papers were found. After screening 15 papers were included. One plate placed on lateral border (tension zone) presented lower risk than one plate placed on superior border (tension zone) for infection [risk ratio (RR): 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33 to 0.71] and plate removal necessity (RR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.69), with moderate quality of evidence. There were no significant differences among the mandibular angle fracture treatments for malocclusion and paraesthesia outcomes. In conclusion, one plate placed on the lateral border in the tension zone is the best choice regarding postoperative infection and plate removal necessity when fixing mandibular angle fractures. None of the tested fixation methods were associated with a significant risk of malocclusion and paraesthesia events.

Transbuccal Approach in Management of Mandible Angle Fracture

With expanding dimensions and an eminent member of trauma team many Ear Nose Throat specialists are exposed to Oro-maxillofacial trauma. Mandibular angle is a difficult region to operate owing to its unique anatomy. Anglefractures form around 30-40% of the mandibular fracture. Open reduction and internal plating is the management of choice in most angle fractures and various approaches have been described in literature. We conducted a study of trans-buccal approach for management of mandibular angle fractures. It was a non-randomised observational study. 57 patients of mandible angle fractures were included in the study. The ORIF was done in these pts under general anaesthesia after careful surgical planning using trans-buccal approach. This approach included an intraoral exposure with stab incision for the trans-buccal passage of drill and screw diver. Out of 57 cases in our study 33 were males and 24 were females. 23/57 patients were in age group 25-35 years whereas 19/57 patients were in age group 15-25 years All 57 patients had good fracture healing. Occlusion dysfunction was seen in only 1 case. Infection was seen 3 cases while intraoral exposure of plates occurred in 2 cases. Average mouth opening was 43.3 mm at 6 weeks with progressive improvement on follow up. Extraoral scar healed well with very good cosmesis in all cases. We strongly suggest the use of transbuccal approach for ORIF in mandibular angle fractures owing to the ease of procedure, comfort of surgeon and less complication rate.

Postoperative Complications Associated With Different Fixation Methods of Isolated Mandibular Angle Fractures

The objective of this study was to review the medical records of patients with a history of mandibular angle fracture who were attended at the Service of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Traumatology of FOAr/UNESP in the last 5 years. The data collected were subjected to chi-squared test (significance level of 5%). The authors reviewed 19 medical records. The main cause was physical aggression (58.00%), but with no statistical difference in relation to the other etiologies (P > 0.05). Regarding the type of fixation, one 2.0-mm system plate associated with one 2.4-mm system plate and the fixation using only two 2.0-mm system plates were used in 7 patients each. The fixation method with a monocortical plate at the upper border was used in 5 patients. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of complications among the 3 fixation methods used (P > 0.05). In 52.64% of the patients, the third molar was removed intraoperatively. Despite this, there was no statistically significant difference in the frequency of complications when the third molar was in the fracture line or when it was removed postoperatively (P > 0.05). The complications observed were dehiscence associated with pain (44.44%), trismus (22.22%), infection (22.22%), and presence of bone spicules (11.11%). However, no statistical differences were observed between the frequency of different types of complications (P = 0.779). In the sample studied, there were no differences in the frequency of complications among the fixation methods applied.

Mandibular angle fractures treated with a single miniplate without postoperative maxillomandibular fixation: A retrospective evaluation of 50 patients

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study evaluated the use of a single miniplate for the treatment of mandibular angle fractures (MAF).

METHODS

Fifty patients with 53 MAF were treated by open reduction and internal fixation with the use of a single miniplate and were analyzed in this study.

RESULTS

Five patients with MAF had postoperative complications that required additional procedures. Three patients had postoperative infection, one patient complained of malocclusion in the first postoperative week, and one patient had miniplate exposure three months after surgery. Every additional procedure was performed in the office under local anesthesia without disruption of the initial fracture treatment. Postoperative maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) was performed in four patients. Treatment of MAF using a single miniplate was effective, with low morbidity and with low rates of postoperative complications. MAF can be treated without MMF, and stability is improved when long miniplates are used.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a single miniplate is therefore encouraged. However, postoperative MMF should be considered with the presence of little contact between bone segments, malocclusion, or extensive tooth loss.

Hardware Removal in Craniomaxillofacial Trauma: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Management Algorithm

Background

Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) fractures are typically treated with open reduction and internal fixation. Open reduction and internal fixation can be complicated by hardware exposure or infection. The literature often does not differentiate between these 2 entities; so for this study, we have considered all hardware exposures as hardware infections. Approximately 5% of adults with CMF trauma are thought to develop hardware infections. Management consists of either removing the hardware versus leaving it in situ. The optimal approach has not been investigated. Thus, a systematic review of the literature was undertaken and a resultant evidence-based approach to the treatment and management of CMF hardware infections was devised.

Materials and Methods

A comprehensive search of journal articles was performed in parallel using MEDLINE, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect electronic databases. Keywords and phrases used were maxillofacial injuries; facial bones; wounds and injuries; fracture fixation, internal; wound infection; and infection. Our search yielded 529 articles. To focus on CMF fractures with hardware infections, the full text of English-language articles was reviewed to identify articles focusing on the evaluation and management of infected hardware in CMF trauma. Each article’s reference list was manually reviewed and citation analysis performed to identify articles missed by the search strategy. There were 259 articles that met the full inclusion criteria and form the basis of this systematic review. The articles were rated based on the level of evidence. There were 81 grade II articles included in the meta-analysis.

Result

Our meta-analysis revealed that 7503 patients were treated with hardware for CMF fractures in the 81 grade II articles. Hardware infection occurred in 510 (6.8%) of these patients. Of those infections, hardware removal occurred in 264 (51.8%) patients; hardware was left in place in 166 (32.6%) patients; and in 80 (15.6%) cases, there was no report as to hardware management. Finally, our review revealed that there were no reported differences in outcomes between groups.

Conclusions

Management of CMF hardware infections should be performed in a sequential and consistent manner to optimize outcome. An evidence-based algorithm for management of CMF hardware infections based on this critical review of the literature is presented and discussed.

Transbuccal versus transoral approach for management of mandibular angle fractures: a prospective, clinical and radiographic study

Objectives

We compared the transbuccal and transoral approaches in the management of mandibular angle fractures.

Materials and Methods

Sixty patients with mandibular angle fractures were randomly divided into two equal groups (A, transoral approach; group B, transbuccal approach) who received fracture reduction using a single 2.5 mm 4 holed miniplate with a bar using either of the two approaches. Intraoperatively, the surgical time and the ease of surgical assess for fixation were noted. Patients were followed at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively and evaluated clinically for post-surgical complications like scarring, infection, postoperative occlusal discrepancy, malunion, and non-union. Radiographically, the interpretation of fracture reduction was also performed by studying the fracture gap following reduction using orthopantomogram tracing. The data was tabulated and subjected to statistical analysis. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

No significant difference was seen between the two groups for variables like surgical time and ease of fixation. Radiographic interpretation of fracture reduction revealed statistical significance for group B from points B to D as compared to group A. No cases of malunion/non-union were noted. A single case of hypertrophic scar formation was noted in group B at 6 months postsurgery. Infection was noted in 2 patients in group B compared to 6 patients in group A. There was significantly more occlusal discrepancy in group A compared to group B at 1 week postoperatively, but no long standing discrepancy was noted in either group at the 6 months follow-up.

Conclusion

The transbuccal approach was superior to the transoral approach with regard to radiographic reduction of the fracture gap, inconspicuous external scarring, and fewer postoperative complications. We preferred the transbuccal approach due to ease of use, minimal requirement for plate bending, and facilitation of plate placement in the neutral mid-point area of the mandible.

The use of three-dimensional strut plates for the management of mandibular angle fractures: a retrospective analysis of 222 patients

This study was performed to evaluate the use of three-dimensional (3D) strut plates for the surgical management of mandibular angle fractures and to determine the subsequent postoperative complication rate. Two hundred and twenty-two patients met the inclusion criteria for mandible angle fracture at the university hospital in Miami between 2009 and 2013 and were included in this study. The treatment protocol for mandibular angle fractures included open reduction and internal fixation with the utilization of a 3D strut plate. Patients were not placed in postoperative intermaxillary fixation. An evaluation of the cases revealed a complication rate of 15.3%, of which 6.8% were considered major complications requiring a surgical intervention. The 3D strut plate has been found to have many advantages over single miniplate techniques with respect to the stability of the fracture and the rate of complications. Based on the current data, 3D strut plates provide a predictable result in the treatment of mandibular angle fractures.

Mandibular fractures - towards a national standard for "time to theatre" - national audit by the BAOMS Trauma Specialist Interest Group

Recent studies have shown that in most patients, a delay of several days in the treatment of mandibular fractures is not associated with adverse outcomes, and this has challenged the traditional practice of recommending treatment within 24hours. Longer hospital stays cost more and lower the patients' quality of life, but we know of no standard recommendation about when these patients should be treated. Our aim therefore was to find out how many patients had reduction and fixation of a fractured mandible by the end of the next working day, with a view to developing a national standard. We invited all oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) units in the UK to participate in a prospective audit over two months, and 35 agreed. Overall, 506 patients (80%) were operated on by the end of the next working day. The time to theatre varied from 1 hour 15minutes to 11 days, 20hours and 51minutes (median 22hours 7minutes). Patients admitted to units with an OMFS trauma list were more likely to be operated on by the next working day (p=0.011) as were those operated on at the weekend (p=0.019). We think that early fixation, return of function, and discharge, benefit patients most in terms of quality of life. Also, shorter hospital stays and reduced costs increase the availability of resources for elective operations. Setting a standard will improve our service and the care we deliver.

Miniplate osteosynthesis for mandibular angle fractures--A retrospective comparative study of 3 concepts in a temporal cohort

PURPOSE

Purpose of this retrospective study was to compare fixation of mandibular angle fractures by three different miniplating-concepts (single miniplate, double miniplate, TriLock mandibular angle plate) regarding osteosynthesis failure and hardware removal.

METHODS

In this retrospective study a temporal cohort of 184 patients with 194 simple mandibular angle fractures, which had been treated by open reduction and internal fixation via miniplates at the University Clinic of Cranio-, Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery (General Hospital Vienna) in the period of 2005-2011, were included. Patients with pathologic fractures (e.g. tumour or osteonecrosis related) or comminuted fractures were not considered.

RESULTS

9 of 194 (4.6%) fractures showed osteosynthesis failures. The osteosynthesis failure rates were 2.9% in the single miniplate group, 3.4% in the TriLock plate group, and 11.1% in the double miniplate group. In the double miniplate group 33.3% of the patients had undergone hardware removal, 21.4% in the single miniplate group, and 11.4% in the TriLock plate group.

CONCLUSION

A single 4-hole locking plate with a thickness of 1.25-1.3 mm guarantees for low osteosynthesis failure rates without postoperative maxillo-mandibular fixation and requires less hardware removal in simple mandibular angle fractures. Two miniplates, longer plates with more holes and thicker plates are prone to hardware removal.

Reporting of Postoperative Pain Management Protocols in Randomized Clinical Trials of Mandibular Fracture Repair: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

The control of pain associated with mandibular fractures is an important treatment outcome that affects function, adherence to treatment regimens, and patient comfort and satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the pain management protocols reported in studies of mandibular fractures, including the reporting of quality-of-life measures.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for randomized clinical trials published from 1970 to July 2014. We followed PRISMA reporting standards to assess study eligibility and extract data. Studies of patients older than 16 years who underwent operative mandibular fracture management were included. The primary data collected included the type of analgesic prescribed, associated adverse effects of the analgesic, method of pain assessment, and use of quality-of-life measures. A pain attentiveness score was assigned to studies based on the comprehensiveness of the information reported. Several variables were reviewed to determine the factors that predict reporting of pain-related data. Assessments of risk for bias were performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's domain-based evaluation method.

FINDINGS

The initial search identified 111 articles, of which 38 met inclusion criteria. Among the 38 reviewed articles, there were 38 trials and 1808 unique patients represented. Among the 38 articles, the procedures reported included maxillomandibular fixation only in 6 (16%), open reduction with internal fixation only in 20 (53%), and both in 12 (32%). Specific analgesics prescribed were reported in only 5 of the 38 studies (13%), and 3 of these used a combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen (paracetamol). Thirteen studies (34%) reported pain assessments and 5 (13%) included quality-of-life measures. Geographic region was the only variable that predicted pain attentiveness, with studies from Europe (3 of 11 studies [27%]) and Asia (6 of 16 studies [38%]) most likely to have a high pain attentiveness score. A low rating was least common in the United States (2 of 5 studies [40%]) (P = .047, Fisher exact test). Most of the studies had unclear (n = 27) or high (n = 6) risks for bias in the key domains assessed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Pain management is a neglected outcome in randomized clinical trials of mandibular trauma; most studies did not describe the specific analgesics used. Many randomized clinical trials (13 [34%]) assessed pain levels among patients without providing information about the agents prescribed. The incorporation of validated pain measures and quality-of-life scores in future studies of mandibular trauma would focus attention on this key outcome measure.

Comparison of intraoral and extraoral approaches to mandibular angle fracture repair with cost implications

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this study was to analyze outcomes of intraoral and extraoral approaches to mandibular angle fractures and provide cost estimates for comparison.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review from January 2005 to June 2013 was performed of patients who underwent open reduction internal fixation of mandibular angle fractures at a level I trauma center.

METHODS

Patients were treated by three surgical specialties: otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, oral and maxillofacial surgery, and plastic and reconstructive surgery. Inpatient and outpatient medical records were reviewed for pertinent data including age, gender, duration of follow-up, presence of other mandible fractures, surgical approach, surgical team, operative time, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of the 155 patients with mandibular angle fractures, 74% underwent open reduction internal fixation through an intraoral approach, whereas 26% of patients were treated with an extraoral approach. The occurrence of any complication was 69.6% in the extraoral group and 39% in the intraoral group (P = 0.009). In propensity-weighted analysis, however, the occurrence of any complication was less frequent in intraoral cases but no longer statistically significant (odd ratio 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.08 to 1.02; P = 0.053). Operating room time was significantly shorter with the intraoral approach. We estimate that the intraoral approach directly saves at least $2,900 per case.

CONCLUSION

We recommend the use of an intraoral approach for the repair of mandibular angle fractures when clinically appropriate. This can result in a comparable rate of success, however, with significant cost savings to the health care system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 126:591-595, 2016.

Evidence-Based Facial Fracture Management

With demands for an evidence-based approach to patient care, the management of facial fractures will come under increasing scrutiny because there is an overall deficiency in higher level clinical evidence. This article reviews the management of facial fractures, focusing on an evidence-based approach. It focuses on select areas of facial trauma in which there is controversy and presents randomized studies and meta-analysis to help define best practice. The article notes the many areas where the evidenced-based literature is weak and looks at the future of evidence-based facial trauma care.

Fixation of mandibular angle fractures: clinical studies

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to review the literature regarding the evolution of current thoughts on fixation of mandibular angle fractures (MAFs).

METHODS

An electronic search in PubMed was undertaken in August 2012. The titles and abstracts from these results were read to identify studies within the selection criteria. Eligibility criteria included studies from the last 30 years (from 1983 onwards) reporting clinical studies of MAFs.

RESULTS

The search strategy initially identified 767 studies. The references from 1983 onwards totaled 727 articles. Fifty-four studies were identified without repetition within the selection criteria. Two articles showing significance in the development of treatment techniques were included. Additional hand-searching yielded 13 additional papers. Thus, a total of 69 studies were included.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective randomized controlled studies of MAFs repair techniques are scarce. The available data at best predict that complications are associated with all kinds of fixation techniques. The similar results of complications in studies using different methods of fixation indicate that biomechanics are only one factor to be considered when treating MAFs. A second fracture in the mandible (which was observed in the majority of the studies' population) can confound the outcome data because the fixation requirements of a double fracture are often different from those for an isolated fracture. It can be necessary additional effort intended for increase of stability when using biodegradable plate system to fixate MAFs. The use of 1.3 mm malleable miniplates was associated with an unacceptable incidence of plate fracture, suggesting that this is not the most adequate system to treat MAFs. The use of the 3D grid plates has shown good clinical results. The efficiency of locking miniplate system is yet to be proven because there are few clinical studies with its use to fixate MAFs, although they have shown good results. When considering the use of semirigid or rigid fixation systems, the use of two miniplates outweigh the advantages of the use of one reconstruction plate, although the use of miniplates is not recommended for displaced comminuted MAFs. Although it has been shown that absolute rigid fixation is not necessary for fracture healing, any system that provides superior stability without impacting negatively on other aspects of the procedure, i.e., time, exposure, and cost, should be favored. MAFs can be treated in a highly effective way and with a relatively low rate of complications with monocortical miniplate fixation. The large number of studies on the treatment of MAF reflects the fact that a consensus has not been reached for a single, ideal treatment method.

Interventions for the management of mandibular fractures

BACKGROUND

Fractures of the mandible (lower jaw) are a common occurrence and usually related to interpersonal violence or road traffic accidents. Mandibular fractures may be treated using open (surgical) and closed (non-surgical) techniques. Fracture sites are immobilized with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) or other external or internal devices (i.e. plates and screws) to allow bone healing. Various techniques have been used, however uncertainty exists with respect to the specific indications for each approach.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to provide reliable evidence of the effects of any interventions either open (surgical) or closed (non-surgical) that can be used in the management of mandibular fractures, excluding the condyles, in adult patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 28 February 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 28 February 2013), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 28 February 2013), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (to 7 April 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (to 7 April 2013) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 7 April 2013). The reference lists of all trials identified were checked for further studies. There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating the management of mandibular fractures without condylar involvement. Any studies that compared different treatment approaches were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Results were to be expressed as random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was to be investigated to include both clinical and methodological factors.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies, assessed as high (six) and unclear (six) risk of bias, comprising 689 participants (830 fractures), were included. Interventions examined different plate materials and morphology; use of one or two lag screws; microplate versus miniplate; early and delayed mobilization; eyelet wires versus Rapid IMF™ and the management of angle fractures with intraoral access alone or combined with a transbuccal approach. Patient-oriented outcomes were largely ignored and post-operative pain scores were inadequately reported. Unfortunately, only one or two trials with small sample sizes were conducted for each comparison and outcome. Our results and conclusions should therefore be interpreted with caution. We were able to pool the results for two comparisons assessing one outcome. Pooled data from two studies comparing two miniplates versus one miniplate revealed no significant difference in the risk of post-operative infection of surgical site (risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% CI 0.41 to 4.22, P = 0.64, I(2) = 0%). Similarly, no difference in post-operative infection between the use of two 3-dimensional (3D) and standard (2D) miniplates was determined (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.13, P = 0.81, I(2) = 27%). The included studies involved a small number of participants with a low number of events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review illustrates that there is currently inadequate evidence to support the effectiveness of a single approach in the management of mandibular fractures without condylar involvement. The lack of high quality evidence may be explained by clinical diversity, variability in assessment tools used and difficulty in grading outcomes with existing measurement tools. Until high level evidence is available, treatment decisions should continue to be based on the clinician's prior experience and the individual circumstances.