Padmanidhi Agarwal1, Divya Mehrotra2. 1. Department of Dentistry and Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of this article was to study and devise a classification of fracture patterns of the mandibular ramus to facilitate management. METHODS: Mandibular ramus fracture demographics in literature were reviewed along with evaluation of the patients diagnosed with mandibular ramus fractures who had reported to the emergency/outpatient clinic of our Institute in the last 5 years. Epidemiology of these ramus fractures was studied, and these ramus fractures were categorized into repetitive patterns on the basis of radiological observations in an effort to achieve a simplified classification. RESULTS: A total of 1372 trauma patients were diagnosed with mandibular fractures, of which an incidence of 2.4% was recorded for ramus fractures. These were predominantly in males and mainly due to road traffic accidents commonly in people driving two-wheeler vehicles (64%). Ramus fractures seldom occur in isolation. Five predictable fracture patterns were observed and accordingly classified as types I to V. Type I was the most common and type IV the least. Open reduction was done in 45.5% patients with non-compression plating systems. Satisfactory aesthetic and functional outcomes were achieved in all patients. CONCLUSION: The mandibular ramus fractures although rare need to be well understood and demarcated. The classification highlights the importance of this mandibular buttress and focuses on the importance of its technically and anatomically more complicated fracture treatment. Future studies are needed to compare the modalities of management.
AIMS: The purpose of this article was to study and devise a classification of fracture patterns of the mandibular ramus to facilitate management. METHODS: Mandibular ramus fracture demographics in literature were reviewed along with evaluation of the patients diagnosed with mandibular ramus fractures who had reported to the emergency/outpatient clinic of our Institute in the last 5 years. Epidemiology of these ramus fractures was studied, and these ramus fractures were categorized into repetitive patterns on the basis of radiological observations in an effort to achieve a simplified classification. RESULTS: A total of 1372 trauma patients were diagnosed with mandibular fractures, of which an incidence of 2.4% was recorded for ramus fractures. These were predominantly in males and mainly due to road traffic accidents commonly in people driving two-wheeler vehicles (64%). Ramus fractures seldom occur in isolation. Five predictable fracture patterns were observed and accordingly classified as types I to V. Type I was the most common and type IV the least. Open reduction was done in 45.5% patients with non-compression plating systems. Satisfactory aesthetic and functional outcomes were achieved in all patients. CONCLUSION: The mandibular ramus fractures although rare need to be well understood and demarcated. The classification highlights the importance of this mandibular buttress and focuses on the importance of its technically and anatomically more complicated fracture treatment. Future studies are needed to compare the modalities of management.
Authors: Kyosti Oikarinen; Lukman Thalib; George K B Sàndor; Petr Schutz; Cameron M L Clokie; Slavek Safar; Tina Meisami; Ulla Perheentupa Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.927