I Ogura1, T Kaneda, Y Sasaki, K Buch, O Sakai. 1. Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Dentistry at Matsudo, 2-870-1, Sakaecho-Nishi, 271-8587, Matsudo, Chiba, Japan, ogura.ichirou@nihon-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Temporal bone fracture after mandibular trauma is thought to be rare, and its prevalence has not been reported in the literature. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of temporal bone fractures in patients with mandibular fractures and the relationship between temporal bone fractures and the mandibular fracture location using multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT). METHODS: A prospective study was performed in 201 patients with mandibular fractures who underwent 64-MDCT scans. The mandibular fracture locations were classified as median, paramedian, angle, and condylar types. Statistical analysis for the relationship between prevalence of temporal bone fractures and mandibular fracture locations was performed using χ(2) test with Fisher's exact test. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The percentage of cases with temporal bone fracture was 3.0 % of all patients with mandibular fractures and 19.0 % of those with multiple mandibular fractures of paramedian and condylar type. There was a significant relationship between the incidence of temporal bone fracture and the paramedian- and condylar-type mandibular fracture (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple mandibular fractures of paramedian and condylar type may be a stronger indicator for temporal bone fractures. This study suggests that patients with mandibular fracture, especially the paramedian and condylar type, should be examined for coexisting temporal bone fracture using MDCT.
PURPOSE:Temporal bone fracture after mandibular trauma is thought to be rare, and its prevalence has not been reported in the literature. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of temporal bone fractures in patients with mandibular fractures and the relationship between temporal bone fractures and the mandibular fracture location using multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT). METHODS: A prospective study was performed in 201 patients with mandibular fractures who underwent 64-MDCT scans. The mandibular fracture locations were classified as median, paramedian, angle, and condylar types. Statistical analysis for the relationship between prevalence of temporal bone fractures and mandibular fracture locations was performed using χ(2) test with Fisher's exact test. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The percentage of cases with temporal bone fracture was 3.0 % of all patients with mandibular fractures and 19.0 % of those with multiple mandibular fractures of paramedian and condylar type. There was a significant relationship between the incidence of temporal bone fracture and the paramedian- and condylar-type mandibular fracture (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple mandibular fractures of paramedian and condylar type may be a stronger indicator for temporal bone fractures. This study suggests that patients with mandibular fracture, especially the paramedian and condylar type, should be examined for coexisting temporal bone fracture using MDCT.