Complications after Close Reduction Treatment of Mandibular Condyle Fractures
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: There are two methods for treatment mandibular condyle fracture which are close reduction with maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) and open reduction with plate & screw (PAS) with MMF. There is no recently evidence proves that which one of those treatments is better. There is also no evidence on advantages and disadvantages of those two treatments which can bring the post-operative complication. The decision of what treatment should be used depends on the physician who is responsible for that patient. In present, there is still no absolute indication for mandibular condyle fracture treatment . If the complications following conservative treatment can be identified and their severity understood, this information will assist doctors in deciding on the most effective, appropriate, and cost-effective treatment methods.
Objective: To study complications after non-surgical treatment of mandibular condyle fracture in Buri Ram Hospital. This information will assist doctors in deciding on the most effective treatment methods.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study from medical record review included 52 patients with unilateral mandibular condylar fractures between 1 July 2017 to 31 July 2023 at Buri Ram Hospital. The statistical analysis was descriptive study.
Results: There were 52 patients with an average age was 33.0(+15.2) years. The patients consisted of 42 men (80.0%) and 10 women (20.0%). The most common mechanism of injury was motorcycle accident (80.0%). The most common associated injury was mild and moderate head injury (40.0%). The deviation of the chin on mouth opening (chin swaying) was found in 40.0%, poor occlusion 19.2%, TMJ pain 9.5%, and abnormal inter incisive distance was found in 5.7% of the patients.
Conclusions: The most common complication after non-surgical treatment of mandibular condyle fracture is chin swaying, while no complication, poor occlusion, TMJ pain and abnormal inter incisive distance is less commonly found. The most common associated injury was head injury.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Reddy NV, Reddy PB, Rajan R, Ganti S, Jhawar DK, Potturi A, et al. Analysis of patterns and treatment strategies for mandibular condyle fractures: review of 175 condyle fractures with review of literature. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2013;12(3):315-20.
doi: 10.1007/s12663-012-0428-9.
Baker AW, McMahon J, Moos KF. Current consensus on the management of fractures of the mandibular condyle. A method by questionnaire. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998;27(4):258-66. doi: 10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80507-7.
Haug RH, Assael LA. Outcomes of open versus closed treatment of mandibular subcondylar fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59(4):370-5; discussion 375-6. doi: 10.1053/joms.2001.21868.
Ellis E 3rd, Palmieri C, Throckmorton G. Further displacement of condylar process fractures after closed treatment.J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;57(11):1307-16; discussion 1316-7. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(99)90867-4.
Ellis E 3rd, Throckmorton G. Facial symmetry after closed and open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar process. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58(7):719-28; discussion 729-30. doi: 10.1053/joms.2000.7253.
Ellis E 3rd, McFadden D, Simon P, Throckmorton G. Surgical complications with open treatment of mandibular condylar process fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58(9):950-8. doi: 10.1053/joms.2000.8734.
Worsaae N, Thorn JJ. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of unilateral dislocated low subcondylar fractures: a clinical study of 52 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994;52(4):353-60; discussion 360-1. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(94)90436-7.
Konstantinović VS, Dimitrijević B.Surgical versus conservative treatment of unilateral condylar process fractures: clinical and radiographic evaluation of 80 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;50(4):349-52; discussion 352-3. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(92)90395-g.
Takenoshita Y, Ishibashi H, Oka M. Comparison of functional recovery after nonsurgical and surgical treatment of condylar fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48(11):1191-5. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(90)90535-a.
Ellis E 3rd, Simon P, Throckmorton GS. Occlusal results after open or closed treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar process. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000;58(3):260-8. doi: 10.1016/s0278-2391(00)90047-8.
