Iatrogenic Mandibular Fracture Associated With Third Molar Removal After Mandibular Angle Osteotectomy

Removal of lower third molar corresponds to one of the most common procedures in oral surgery. The extraction can result in several intraoperative or postoperative complications, especially when fully impacted molars are involved. This case report describes a mandibular angle fracture following removal of a fully impacted lower third molar of a 41 years old male patient. The fracture occurred 3 days after the attempt to extract the tooth 38 by a dentist surgeon. Several factors influencing the possibility of fracture including gender, age, dental position, and angulation were reviewed and associated with the injury. A fracture line in the angular region of the jaw was observed in radiological and tomographic analysis, both essential to perform the diagnosis. Open reduction internal fixation treatment approach was realized to ensure the best patient’s recovery. We conclude that the difficult to maintain a soft diet and the complete dentition factor could have been determinant to cause the fracture.Descriptors: Mandibular Fractures; Fracture Fixation; Molar, Third.ReferencesAl-Belasy FA, Tozoglu S, Ertas U. Mastication and late mandibular fracture after surgery of impacted third molars associated with no gross pathology. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67(4):856-61.daBodner L, Brennan PA, McLeod NM. Characteristics of iatrogenic mandibular fractures associated with tooth removal: review and analysis of 189 cases. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;49(7):567-72.Bouloux GF, Steed MB, Perciaccante VJ. Complications of third molar surgery. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2007; 19(1):117-28.Joshi A, Goel M, Thorat A. Identifying the risk factors causing iatrogenic mandibular fractures associated with exodontia: a systemic meta-analysis of 200 cases from 1953 to 2015. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;20(4):391-96.Libersa P, Roze D, Cachart T, Libersa JC. Immediate and late mandibular fractures after third molar removal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60(2):163-66.Perry PA, Goldberg MH. Late mandibular fracture after third molar surgery: a survey of Connecticut oral and maxillofacial surgeons. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(8):858-61.Pires WR, Bonardi JP, Faverani LP, Momesso GAC, Muñoz XMJP, Silva AFM et al. Late mandibular fracture occurring in the postoperative period after third molar removal: systematic review and analysis of 124 cases. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;46(1):46-53.Krimmel M, Reinert S. Mandibular fracture after third molar removal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(10):1110-12.Wagner KW, Otten JE, Schoen R, Schmelzeisen R. Pathological mandibular fractures following third molar removal. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;34(7):722-26.Ethunandan M, Shanahan D, Patel M. Iatrogenic mandibular fractures following removal of impacted third molars: an analysis of 130 cases. Br Dent J. 2012;212(4):179-84.Ellis E 3rd. Management of fractures through the angle of the mandible. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2009;21(2):163-74.Pell GJ, Gregory GT. Report on a ten year study of a tooth division technique for removal of impacted teeth. Am J Orthodont Surg. 1942; 28:660-71.Antoun JS, Lee KH. Sports-related maxillofacial fractures over an 11-year period. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(3):504-8.Chrcanovic BR, Custódio AL. Considerations of mandibular angle fractures during and after surgery for removal of third molars: a review of the literature. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 14(2):71-80. Iizuka T, Tanner S, Berthold H. Mandibular fractures following third molar extraction. A retrospective clinical and radiological study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;26(5):338-43.Woldenberg Y, Gatot I, Bodner L. Iatrogenic mandibular fracture associated with third molar removal. Can it be prevented?. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2007;12(1):E70-2.Miyaura K, Matsuka Y, Morita M, Yamashita A, Watanabe T. Comparison of biting forces in different age and sex groups: a study of biting efficiency with mobile and non-mobile teeth. J Oral Rehabil. 1999;26(3):223-27.Bezerra TP, Studart-Soares EC, Pita-Neto IC, Costa FW, Batista SH. Do third molars weaken the mandibular angle?. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011;16(5):e657-63.Grau-Manclús V, Gargallo-Albiol J, Almendros-Marqués N, Gay-Escoda C. Mandibular fractures related to the surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars: a report of 11 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(5):1286-90.

Download Full-text

Association between eruption state of the third molar and the occurrence of mandibular angle fractures

Dental Traumatology ◽

10.1111/edt.12260 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 32 (5) ◽

pp. 347-352 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Roman K. Rahimi-Nedjat ◽

Keyvan Sagheb ◽

Collin Jacobs ◽

Christian Walter

Keyword(s):

Third Molar ◽

Mandibular Angle ◽

The Third ◽

Angle Fractures

Download Full-text

Late mandibular fracture after third molar surgery: A survey of Connecticut oral and maxillofacial surgeons

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

10.1053/joms.2000.8204 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 58 (8) ◽

pp. 858-861 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

P.Anthony Perry ◽

Morton H. Goldberg

Keyword(s):

Third Molar ◽

Mandibular Fracture ◽

Third Molar Surgery

Download Full-text

Qualitative and quantitative assessment of relationship between mandibular third molar and angle fracture on North Indian population: A clinico-radiographic study

European Journal of Dentistry ◽

10.4103/1305-7456.110188 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 07 (02) ◽

pp. 212-217 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Suresh Yadav ◽

Shallu Tyagi ◽

Naveen Puri ◽

Prince Kumar ◽

Puneet Kumar

Keyword(s):

Third Molar ◽

Indian Territory ◽

Mandibular Angle ◽

The North ◽

Mandibular Angle Fracture ◽

Mandibular Third Molar ◽

Angle Fracture ◽

Angle Fractures ◽

Inferior Border ◽

The Relationship

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess the relationship between impacted mandibular third molar presence and the risk for mandibular angle fracture with the effect of various positions of mandibular third molar and the risk of mandibular angle fracture. Materials and Methods: In the North Indian territory, a total of 289 patients with mandibular angle fractures were studied and evaluated for the possible relationship with impacted third molar on the basis of clinical and panoramic radiographical findings. Results: Results that confirmed the highest risk for mandibular angle fracture was associated with mesioangular angulations (45.42%) followed by vertical (26.34%), distoangular in sequence and least risk was found with bucco-version angulations (2.67%) according to Winter′s classification. Additionally, the highest risk of mandibular angle fracture was reported with partially erupted third molar (47.75%), followed by erupted (23.53%) and unerupted third molar (19.38%). Conclusion: The risk for mandibular angle fracture is not only affected by status of eruption, angulations, position, number of roots present in third molar but also by the distance of mandibular third molar from inferior border of mandible and the percentage of remaining amount of bone at the mandibular angle region.

Download Full-text

Transoral versus extraoral approach for mandibular angle fractures: A comparative study

Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery ◽

10.4103/0970-0358.146590 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 47 (03) ◽

pp. 354-361 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Sathya Kumar Devireddy ◽

R.V. Kishore Kumar ◽

Rajasekhar Gali ◽

Sridhar Reddy Kanubaddy ◽

Mallikarjuna Rao Dasari ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Masseter Muscle ◽

Third Molar ◽

Fracture Line ◽

Difficulty Level ◽

Mandibular Angle ◽

Group I ◽

Maxillofacial Fractures ◽

Severe Difficulty ◽

Group Ii ◽

Angle Fractures

ABSTRACT Introduction: Mandibular fractures represent approximately two-thirds of all the maxillofacial fractures (nearly 70%) out of which fractures of mandibular angle represent for 26-35%. Aim of the Study: The aim of this study is to compare the transoral and extraoral (submandibular) approaches for fixation of mandibular angle fractures. Objectives of Study: The objectives of the following study are to evaluate ease of accessibility, time taken for the procedure, ease of anatomic reduction and complications. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was carried out in 30 patients reporting to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial surgery, Narayana Dental College and Hospital, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh during the period of months from November 2011 to August 2013 who were randomly divided in two groups based on computer generated simple randomization chart. Group I patients underwent transoral reduction and fixation and Group II patients underwent extraoral reduction and fixation. The ease of accessibility was analysed by visual analogue scale by the operating surgeon, time taken from incision to closure with digital clock, difficulty level index of surgeon based on the time taken for the procedure and approach related complications. Results: The ease of accessibility in Group I was good in 53.3% while in Group II patients approached extraorally it was good in 86.7%. Group I patients approached transorally showed a mean of 49.7 min while that of Group II patients approached extraorally showed a mean of 73.4 min. Group I had a minimum difficulty level index in 60%, moderate difficulty level in 33.3% and severe difficulty level in 6.7% while Group II had a minimum and moderate difficulty level in 46.7% and severe difficulty level in 6.7%. There was 1 (6.7%) complication reported in each group. Conclusion: The statistical analysis of this study concludes that fracture line starting anterior to mandibular third molar and ending at anteroinferior border of the insertion of the masseter muscle or posterior body of mandible can be approached transorally. Fracture line starting posterior or distal to the third molar or posterior to the insertion of the masseter muscle to the angle of the mandible or fracture line extending high in the ramus, extraoral approach provides a better choice for reduction and fixation of the fractured segments with restoration of anatomical and functional occlusion.

Download Full-text