Conventional two plate fixation versus L-shaped plates in management of mandibular angle fracture: A comparative retrospective study

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 2267-2274
Author(s):  
Omnia Sultan ◽  
Hussein Hatem
2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Dattani ◽  
A Aslam ◽  
K McMillan

Abstract Aim: To evaluate the risk of complications associated with retaining or extracting an asymptomatic third molar in the line of an angle fracture. Aiming to seek a consensus whether third molars should be extracted or retained during surgical repair of mandibular angle fractures. Method A retrospective study was undertaken at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham. 150 patients across a span of three years underwent open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular angle fractures with third molar involvement. Patients were classified into two groups, tooth retention during angle fracture and tooth removal during angle fracture repair. Hospital records were evaluated to seek the rate of post-operative complications at follow-up Results 162 angle fractures were identified with ipsilateral wisdom teeth present. In 37 cases the wisdom tooth was removed during surgery. 6 complications (16.2%) occurred in this group necessitating a return to theatre. In 125 cases the wisdom tooth was left in-situ. Complications necessitating a return to theatre occurred in 14 cases (11.1%). Conclusions This study indicates that retention of wisdom tooth overall did not significantly increase the risk of complications associated with angle fractures (p = 0.42). Where wisdom tooth pathology was noted its retention was associated with complications requiring a return to theatre (X2=4.40, p = 0.036).


2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 1909-1914
Author(s):  
Hussein Hatem ◽  
Ghada Abdel Monim ◽  
Enas Abd El-Ghaffar ◽  
Shaimaa Refahee

2014 ◽  
Vol 72 (9) ◽  
pp. e226-e227
Author(s):  
S.M. Oh ◽  
B.E. Yang ◽  
J.Y. Kim ◽  
K.N. Park ◽  
I.H. Woo

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 526-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Wallner ◽  
Knut Reinbacher ◽  
Matthias Feichtinger ◽  
Mauro Pau ◽  
Georg Feigl ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy S. Xue ◽  
John C. Koshy ◽  
Erik M. Wolfswinkel ◽  
William M. Weathers ◽  
Kristina P. Marsack ◽  
...  

This prospective randomized clinical trial compared the treatment outcomes of strut plate and Champy miniplate in fixation of mandibular angle fractures. Patients with mandibular angle fracture were consented and enrolled into this study. Exclusion criteria include patients with severely comminuted fractures. The patients were randomly assigned to receive the strut plate or Champy miniplate for angle fracture fixation. Patient demographics, fracture characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes were collected prospectively. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the significance of the outcome. A total of 18 patients were included in this study and randomly assigned to receive either the strut plate or Champy miniplate. Out of which five patients were excluded postoperatively due to complex fracture resulting in postoperative maxillomandibular fixation. The final enrollment was 13 patients, N = 6 (strut) and N = 7 (Champy). There was no statistically significant difference in the pretreatment variables. Nine of these patients had other associated facial fractures, including parasymphyseal and subcondylar fractures. Most of the (11) patients had sufficient follow-up after surgery. Both groups exhibited successful clinical unions of the mandibular angle fractures. The complications associated with the mandibular angle were 20% in the strut plate group and 16.7% in the Champy group. One patient in the strut plate group had a parasymphyseal infection, requiring hardware removal. The strut plate demonstrated comparable surgical outcome as the Champy miniplate. It is a safe and effective alternative for management of mandibular angle fracture.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document