Head Injury- A Maxillofacial Surgeon's Perspective

Cervical Spine Injuries and Maxillofacial Trauma: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Identify specific maxillofacial trauma patterns associated with cervical spine injuries.

METHODS

The protocol was developed according to (PRISMA-P) and was admitted to PROSPERO under accreditation code #CRD42020177816. Furthermore, the reporting of the present SR was conducted based on the PRISMA checklist.

RESULTS

Of the 1,407,750 patients recorded, a total of 115,997 patients (12.13%) had MFF with an associated CSI with a gender proportion (M:F) of 3.63:1 respectively. Motor vehicle accident was the most common cause of the combined Maxillofacial Trauma (MFT) and CSI. The most common CSI location was at the C2, followed by the C5 cervical spines. The most common location of a maxillofacial fracture resulting in a CSI was the mandible.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of the association of CSIs with MFT has been low (12.13%). Nevertheless, in cases of an isolated mandibular trauma due to a severe blow presenting with a low Glasgow Coma Scale, maxillofacial surgeons should be at a high alert of an associated CSI.

Fracture heat map of the facial skull demonstrates a danger zone of concomitant cervical spine injuries

Concomitant maxillofacial and cervical spine injuries occur in 0.8-12% of the cases. We examined the relation of injury localization and the probability of cervical spine fracture. A retrospective study was conducted on patients that have been treated at Dortmund General Hospital for injuries both to the maxillofacial region and to the cervical spine between January 1st, 2007 and December 31th, 2017. Descriptive statistical methods were used to describe the correlation of cervical spine injuries with gender, age as well as maxillofacial injury localization. 7708 patients were hospitalized with maxillofacial injury, among them 173 were identified with cervical spine injury. The average ages for both genders lie remarkably above the average of all maxillofacial trauma patients (36.2 y.o. in male and 50.9 y.o. in female). In the group of men, most injuries were found between the ages of 50 and 65. Whereas most injuries among women occurred after the age of 80. The relative ratio of cervical spine injuries (CSI) varies between 1.1 and 5.26% of the maxillofacial injuries (MFI), being highest in the soft tissue injury group, patients with forehead fractures (3.12%) and patients with panfacial fractures (2.52%). Further, nasal, Le Fort I and II, zygomatic complex and mandibular condyle fractures are often associated with CSI. Fractures next to the Frankfurt horizontal plane represent 87.7% of all MFI with concomitant CSI. Patients in critical age groups with a high-energy injury are more likely to suffer both, MFI and CSI injuries. Our findings help to avoid missing the diagnosis of cervical spine injury in maxillofacial trauma patients.

Interplay between traumatic brain injury and intimate partner violence: data driven analysis utilizing electronic health records

Background

It is estimated that a majority of intimate partner violence (IPV) victims suffer from blunt force to the head, neck and the face area. Injuries to head and neck are among the major causes for traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Methods

In this interdisciplinary study, we aimed to characterize the key associations between IPV and TBI by mining de-identified electronic health records data with more than 12 M records between 1999 to 2017 from the IBM Explorys platform. For this purpose, we formulated a data-driven analytical framework to identify significant health correlates among IPV, TBI and six control cohorts. Using this framework, we assessed the co-morbidity, shared prevalence, and synergy between pairs of conditions.

Results

Our findings suggested that health effects attributed to malnutrition, acquired thrombocytopenia, post-traumatic wound infection, local infection of wound, poisoning by cardiovascular drug, alcoholic cirrhosis, alcoholic fatty liver, and drug-induced cirrhosis were highly significant at the joint presence of IPV and TBI.

Conclusion

To develop a better understanding of how IPV is related to negative health effects, it is potentially useful to determine the interactions and relationships between symptom categories. Our results can potentially improve the accuracy and confidence of existing clinical screening techniques on determining IPV-induced TBI diagnoses.