Kritika Sehrawat1, Bhavna Malik2, H V Vallabha3, Amrutham Bhavya Vaishnavi4, Siva Kumar Pendyala5, Mohammed Ibrahim6, Fatima Abdullah Binyahya7. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, BM Gupta Hospital, New Delhi, India. 2. Department of Dentistry, Shri Guru Ram Rai Institute of Medical and Health Sciences and Shri Mahant Indiresh Hospital, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India. 3. Department of Prosthodontics, Dayananda Sagar College of Dental Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. 4. Consultant Dental Surgeon, Kondapur, Rangareddy, Hyderabad, India. 5. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Aimst University, Kedah, Malaysia. 6. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia. 7. Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the facial bones, the angle of the mandible is the common site of fractures. Furthermore, it is the site with the highest number of complications after fracture and hence needs an efficient fixation. The right approach is still debatable for the angle fractures. In the light of these factors, we evaluated the transoral and the transbuccal approaches for the treatment of fractures at the angle of the mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were equally divided into two groups of transoral and transbuccal methods. The parameters such as ease of access, surgical time, occlusion, postsurgical infection, fracture gaps, scarring, and complications were noted, and the values that were compared were statistically analyzed. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: No significant variations were seen in the variables such as ease of access, occlusion, postsurgical infection, and fracture gaps. Surgical time was significantly less for the transoral method. Negligible scarring was noted in the transbuccal method. CONCLUSION: Although both the methods were comparable, the transbuccal approach was more efficient for the mandibular angular fracture treatment. Copyright:
INTRODUCTION: In the facial bones, the angle of the mandible is the common site of fractures. Furthermore, it is the site with the highest number of complications after fracture and hence needs an efficient fixation. The right approach is still debatable for the angle fractures. In the light of these factors, we evaluated the transoral and the transbuccal approaches for the treatment of fractures at the angle of the mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were equally divided into two groups of transoral and transbuccal methods. The parameters such as ease of access, surgical time, occlusion, postsurgical infection, fracture gaps, scarring, and complications were noted, and the values that were compared were statistically analyzed. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: No significant variations were seen in the variables such as ease of access, occlusion, postsurgical infection, and fracture gaps. Surgical time was significantly less for the transoral method. Negligible scarring was noted in the transbuccal method. CONCLUSION: Although both the methods were comparable, the transbuccal approach was more efficient for the mandibular angular fracture treatment. Copyright:
Authors: A W Sugar; A J Gibbons; D W Patton; K C Silvester; S C Hodder; M Gray; H Snooks; A Watkins Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2009-01-22 Impact factor: 2.789