Lucas Cavalieri-Pereira1, Guilherme Spagnol2, Cássio Edvard Sverzut2, Márcio de Moraes1, Alexandre Elias Trivellato3. 1. Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Piracicaba Dental School, State University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Periodontology, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Av. do Café, s/n-Campus USP, 14090-904, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Periodontology, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Av. do Café, s/n-Campus USP, 14090-904, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. eliastrivellato@forp.usp.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the resistance of four fixation techniques used to treat subcondylar fractures. The following techniques were evaluated: fixation with one 4-hole single straight plate; fixation with one 2-mm 4-hole system plate and one 1.5-mm 3-hole system plate; fixation with two 2-mm plates with a 3-hole anterior plate; and fixation with two 2-mm plates with four holes each. STUDY DESIGN: Each fixation technique was subjected to a resistance test. The load values were measured when displacement of 1, 2, and 5 mm was reached. Load values were compared for statistically significant differences using analysis of variance (ANOVA; p < 0.5) and Tukey's test. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed, when the load was applied to the first molar on the side of the fracture. The group treated with a 4-hole, 2-mm, one plate system showed resistance to lower load values than the groups treated with two plates in any combination. CONCLUSIONS: When the fracture was fixed using two plates, regardless of the kind of plates used, no statistically significant difference between the groups was observed. However, two plate systems showed better resistance than one plate systems.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the resistance of four fixation techniques used to treat subcondylar fractures. The following techniques were evaluated: fixation with one 4-hole single straight plate; fixation with one 2-mm 4-hole system plate and one 1.5-mm 3-hole system plate; fixation with two 2-mm plates with a 3-hole anterior plate; and fixation with two 2-mm plates with four holes each. STUDY DESIGN: Each fixation technique was subjected to a resistance test. The load values were measured when displacement of 1, 2, and 5 mm was reached. Load values were compared for statistically significant differences using analysis of variance (ANOVA; p < 0.5) and Tukey's test. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed, when the load was applied to the first molar on the side of the fracture. The group treated with a 4-hole, 2-mm, one plate system showed resistance to lower load values than the groups treated with two plates in any combination. CONCLUSIONS: When the fracture was fixed using two plates, regardless of the kind of plates used, no statistically significant difference between the groups was observed. However, two plate systems showed better resistance than one plate systems.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone plates; Fractures; Mandible; Mandibular condyle
Authors: Andreas Neff; Cyrille Chossegros; Jean-Louis Blanc; Pierre Champsaur; François Cheynet; Bernard Devauchelle; Uwe Eckelt; Joël Ferri; Mário Francisco Real Gabrielli; Laurent Guyot; David Andrew Koppel; Christophe Meyer; Bert Müller; Timo Peltomäki; Fabrizio Spallaccia; Arthur Varoquaux; Astrid Wilk; Poramate Pitak-Arnnop Journal: J Craniomaxillofac Surg Date: 2014-03-29 Impact factor: 2.078