The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Volume 27, Number 6, September 2016 1457
Copyright © 2016 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Oruç et al The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Volume 27, Number 6, September 2016
FIGURE 2. Distribution of additional fracture sites. FIGURE 4. Preferred treatment modalities. IMF, intermaxillary fixation.
Copyright © 2016 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Volume 27, Number 6, September 2016 Analysis of Mandible Fractures
significantly and decreases the comfort of the patients to a lower usage can cause certain disadvantages such as possible gingival
degree. In our study, we did not use arch bars transiently during the damage, tooth loss due to impaired gingival circulation, and
operation for any of the patient. We performed fixation with intraoral hygiene problems. So the usage of arch bars must be
miniplates for 202 fractures and fixation with miniplates and kept in limited amounts for only certain types of fractures and well-
IMF for 125 fractures. Any difference was not detected in between defined indications.
these groups in terms of postoperative complication rates. So,
except certain fractures that can be treated with IMF only, we REFERENCES
do not use IMF as an adjunct to the fixation with miniplates. 1. De Matos FP, Arnez MFM, Sverzut CE, et al. A retrospective study of
Prevention of the complications after the treatment of mandible mandibular fracture in a 40-month period. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
fractures is an important issue too. Independent from the usage of 2010;39:10–15
open or closed reduction, complication rates are directly related to 2. Van den Bergh B, Karagozoglu KH, Heymans MW, et al. Aetiology and
the type of the injury and localization of the fracture. Especially incidence of maxillofacial trauma in Amsterdam: a retrospective
mandibular angle fractures are prone to high postoperative com- analysis of 579 patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2012;40:165–169
plication risk.29 Infection, osteomyelitis, nonunion, malunion, and 3. Edwards TJ, David JD, Simpson DA, et al. Patterns of mandibular
fractures in Adelaide, South Australia. Aust NZ J Surg 1994;64:
wound dehiscence are possible complications.30,31 307–311
In our study, infection was not detected in any of the patients in 4. Ellis E, Moos KF, El-Attar A. Ten years of mandibular fractures: an
the follow-up period. This may be related to the routine usage of analysis of 2,137 cases. Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Surg 1985;59:
antibiotics in our clinical practice in the postoperative period. In the 120–129
literature, antibiotic usage in the follow- up period is a controversial 5. Sakr K, Farag IA, Zeitoun IM. Review of 509 mandibular fractures
subject. There are reports that advocate antibiotic usage in different treated at the University Hospital, Alexandria, Egypt. Br J Oral
dosages and duration.19,32 In contrast to these reports, Abubaker and Maxillofac Surg 2006;44:107–111
Rollert33 have reported in their study that postoperative antibiotic 6. Melmed EP, Koonin AJ. Fractures of the mandible. Plast Reconstr Surg
1975;56:323–327
usage does not have any advantage to decrease infection. In our
7. Stacey DH, Doyle JF, Mount DL, et al. Management of mandible
practice, besides antibiotic usage, in order to decrease possible fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;117:48–60
contamination, feeding with clear liquid diet and usage of oral 8. Gutta R, Tracy K, Johnson C, et al. Outcomes of mandible fracture
antiseptic gargle were also routinely advised to every patient for treatment at an academic tertiary hospital: a 5-year analysis. J Oral
postoperative 2 weeks. Maxillofac Surg 2014;72:550–558
After the surgery, sensory changes are one of the important 9. Olson RA, Fonseca RJ, Osbon DB. Fractures of the mandible: a review
problems too. In our study, signs of paralysis of frontal, marginal of 580 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1982;40:23–28
mandibular and mental nerves were detected after the surgery in 11 10. Bormann KH, Wild S, Gellrich NC, et al. Five-year retrospective study
patients, and these signs were resolved spontaneously in all of these of mandibular fractures in Freiburg, Germany: incidence, etiology,
patients in the postoperative period. Although, it is a frustrating treatment and complications. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:
1251–1255
complication, according to our findings, we can say that sensory 11. Chrcanovic BR, Abreu MHNG, Freire-Maia B, et al. 1454 mandibular
problems are transient most of the time, and they are mostly related fractures: a 3-year study in a hospital in Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
to the traction forces and edema. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2012;40:116–123
Plate and screw removal was performed on 68 patients in our 12. Anderson T, Alpert B. Experience with rigid fixation of mandibular
study. Majority of these patients were complaining about numbness, fractures and immediate function. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;50:
cold intolerance, and pain in the plate area. When these patients 555–560
were analyzed, it was detected that most of the plates were on the 13. Maloney PL, Welch TB, Doku HC. Early immobilization of mandibular
symphysis, parasymphysis, and corpus areas. Besides the decreased fractures: a retrospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:
amount of soft tissue over the plate and screws at these areas, we 698–702
14. Ellis E, Walker L. Treatment of mandibular angle fractures using two
may suggest that easy palpation of these plates can be a possible mini-dynamic compression plates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg
factor for these subjective symptoms. So, psychological factors of 1992;50:958–963
the patients are also important about these symptoms. In our study, 15. Mueller R. Endoscopic treatment of facial fractures. Facial Plast Surg
plate and screw removal was performed mostly within the post- 2008;24:78–91
operative 1 year. It must be kept in mind that removal of these plates 16. Troulis MJ. Endoscopic open reduction and internal rigid fixation of
are very difficult especially after the postoperative second year, and subcondylar fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62:1269–1271
even then the surgeon must be very careful in order not to produce a 17. Schubert W, Jenabzadeh K. Endoscopic approach to maxillofacial
new fracture during this operation. trauma. J Craniofac Surg 2009;20:154–156
18. Hackenberg B, Lee C, Caterson EJ. Management of subcondylar
Besides these, development of nonunion after the treatment of
mandible fractures in the adult patient. J Craniofac Surg 2014;25:
mandible fractures is an important problem too. Marthog et al34 166–171
have stated that there is not a big difference in the nonunion rates 19. Gabrielli MAC, Gabrielli MFR, Marcantonio E, et al. Fixation of
although many developed fixation techniques are used for the mandibular fractures with 2.0-mm miniplates: review of 191 cases.
treatment. Nonunion rates are affected by many factors such as J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:430–436
age, sex, trauma type, and fracture localization. Substance addiction 20. Loukota RA, Eckelt U, De Bont L, et al. Subclassification of fractures of
is also an important factor that must be taken into account. Passeri the condylar process of the mandible. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg
et al have defined a positive correlation between chronic alcohol 2005;43:72–73
and drug usage and complications.35 21. Burch RJ. Treatment of displaced fractures of the edentulous
In conclusion, proper treatment of mandible fractures is very mandibular angle. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1951;4:
1101–1107
important in order to obtain satisfactory functional and cosmetic 22. Bradley RL. Treatment of fractured mandible. Am Surg 1965;31:
results. Although there are different methods to achieve these 289–290
goals, we believe that open reduction and fixation with plating 23. Rai S, Pradhan R. Tooth in the line of fracture: its prognosis and its
systems is the best treatment modality with today’s knowledge. effects on healing. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22:495–496
According to our experience, addition of IMF with arch bars to the 24. Chrcanovic BR. Factors influencing the incidence of maxillofacial
plating systems does not bring any additional profit. Even their fractures. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;16:3–17
Copyright © 2016 Mutaz B. Habal, MD. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Volume 27, Number 6, September 2016 Analysis of Mandible Fractures
25. Zanakis S, Tasoulas J, Angelidis I, et al. Tooth in the line of angle 30. Iizuka T, Lindqvist C. Rigid internal fixation of fractures in the angular
fractures: the impact in the healing process. A retrospective study of 112 region of the mandible: an analysis of factors contributing to different
patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015;43:113–116 complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;91:265–271
26. Nandini GD, Balakrishna R, Rao J. Self tapping v/s Erich arch bar 31. Iizuka T, Lindqvist C, Hallikainen D, et al. Infection after rigid internal
for intermaxillary fixation: a comparative clinical study in the fixation of mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:585–593
treatment of mandibular fractures. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2011;10: 32. Chuong R, Donoff RB, Guralnick WC. A retrospective analysis of 327
127–131 mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1983;41:305–309
27. Baurmash H, Farr D, Baurmash M. Direct bonding of arch bars in the 33. Abubaker AO, Rollert MK. Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis in
management of maxillomandibular injuries. J Oral Maxillofac Surg mandibular fractures: a preliminary randomized, double-blind and
1988;46:813–815 placebo-controlled clinical study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg
28. Lello JL, Lello GE. The effect of interdental continuous loop wire 2001;59:1415–1419
splinting and intermaxillary fixation on the marginal gingiva. Int J Oral 34. Mathog RH, Toma V, Clayman L, et al. Nonunion of the mandible: an
Maxillofac Surg 1988;17:249–252 analysis of contributing factors. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58:746–752
29. Ellis E, Walker L. Treatment of mandibular angle fractures using two 35. Passeri LA, Ellis E, Sinn DP. Relationship of substance abuse to
noncompression miniplates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994;52:1032– complications with mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg
1036 1993;51:22–25