Manual versus rigid intraoperative maxillo-mandibular fixation in the surgical management of mandibular fractures:A European prospective analysis

Purpose: Intraoperative stabilisation of bony fragments with maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) is an essential step in the surgical treatment of mandibular fractures that are treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). The MMF can be performed with or without wire-based methods, rigid or manual MMF, respectively. The aim of this study was to compare the use of manual versus rigid MMF, in terms of occlusal outcomes and infective complications. Materials and methods: This multi-centric prospective study involved 12 European maxillofacial centres and included adult patients (age ≥16 years) with mandibular fractures treated with ORIF. The following data were collected: age, gender, pre-trauma dental status (dentate or partially dentate), cause of injury, fracture site, associated facial fractures, surgical approach, modality of intraoperative MMF (manual or rigid), outcome (minor/major malocclusions and infective complications) and revision surgeries. The main outcome was malocclusion at 6 weeks after surgery. Results: Between May 1, 2021 and April 30, 2022, 319 patients-257 males and 62 females (median age, 28 years)-with mandibular fractures (185 single, 116 double and 18 triple fractures) were hospitalised and treated with ORIF. Intraoperative MMF was performed manually on 112 (35%) patients and with rigid MMF on 207 (65%) patients. The study variables did not differ significantly between the two groups, except for age. Minor occlusion disturbances were observed in 4 (3.6%) patients in the manual MMF group and in 10 (4.8%) patients in the rigid MMF group (p &gt; .05). In the rigid MMF group, only one case of major malocclusion required a revision surgery. Infective complications involved 3.6% and 5.8% of patients in the manual and rigid MMF group, respectively (p &gt; .05). Conclusion: Intraoperative MMF was performed manually in nearly one third of the patients, with wide variability among the centres and no difference observed in terms of number, site and displacement of fractures. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative malocclusion among patients treated with manual or rigid MMF. This suggests that both techniques were equally effective in providing intraoperative MMF.</p

Characteristics and age-related injury patterns of maxillofacial fractures in children and adolescents:A multicentric and prospective study

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Paediatric maxillofacial trauma accounts for 15% of all maxillofacial trauma but remains a leading cause of mortality. The aim of this prospective, multicentric epidemiological study was to analyse the characteristics of maxillofacial fractures in paediatric patients managed in 14 maxillofacial surgery departments on five continents over a 1‐year period. METHODS: The following data were collected: age (preschool [0–6 years], school age [7–12 years], and adolescent [13–18 years]), cause and mechanism of the maxillofacial fracture, alcohol and/or drug abuse at the time of trauma, fracture site, Facial Injury Severity Scale score, associated injuries, day of the maxillofacial trauma, timing and type of treatment, and length of hospitalization. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software. RESULTS: Between 30 September 2019 and 4 October 2020, 322 patients (male:female ratio, 2.3:1) aged 0–18 years (median age, 15 years) were hospitalized with maxillofacial trauma. The most frequent causes of the trauma were road traffic accidents (36%; median age, 15 years), followed by falls (24%; median age, 8 years) and sports (21%; median age, 14 years). Alcohol and/or drug abuse was significantly associated with males (p < .001) and older age (p < .001). Overall, 474 fractures were observed (1.47 per capita). The most affected site was the mandibular condyle in children <13 years old and the nose in adolescents. The proportion of patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation increased with age (p < .001). CONCLUSION: The main cause of paediatric maxillofacial fractures was road traffic accidents, with the highest rates seen in African and Asian centres, and the frequency of such fractures increased with age. Falls showed an inverse association with age and were the leading cause of trauma in children 0–6 years of age. The choice of treatment varies with age, reflecting anatomical and etiological changes towards patterns more similar to those seen in adulthood

A multicentric, prospective study on oral and maxillofacial trauma in the female population around the world

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Approximately 20% of patients with maxillofacial trauma are women, but few articles have analysed this. The aim of this multicentric, prospective, epidemiological study was to analyse the characteristics of maxillofacial fractures in the female population managed in 14 maxillofacial surgery departments on five continents over a 1‐year period. METHODS: The following data were collected: age (0–18, 19–64, or ≥65 years), cause and mechanism of the maxillofacial fracture, alcohol and/or drug abuse at the time of trauma, fracture site, Facial Injury Severity Scale score, associated injury, day of trauma, timing and type of treatment, and length of hospitalization. RESULTS: Between 30 September 2019 and 4 October 2020, 562 of 2387 patients hospitalized with maxillofacial trauma were females (24%; M: F ratio, 3.2:1) aged between 1 and 96 years (median age, 37 years). Most fractures occurred in patients aged 20–39 years. The main causes were falls (43% [median age, 60.5 years]), which were more common in Australian, European and American units (p < .001). They were followed by road traffic accidents (35% [median age, 29.5 years]). Assaults (15% [median age, 31.5 years]) were statistically associated with alcohol and/or drug abuse (p < .001). Of all patients, 39% underwent open reduction and internal fixation, 36% did not receive surgical treatment, and 25% underwent closed reduction. CONCLUSION: Falls were the main cause of maxillofacial injury in the female population in countries with ageing populations, while road traffic accidents were the main cause in African and some Asian centres, especially in patients ≤65 years. Assaults remain a significant cause of trauma, primarily in patients aged 19–64 years, and they are related to alcohol use

European multicenter prospective analysis of the use of maxillomandibular fixation for mandibular fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation

Introduction: The goal of mandibular fracture treatment is to restore static and dynamic occlusal functions. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of these fractures can be associated with an intraoperative and/or postoperative maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF). The aim of this study was to analyse the use of perioperative MMF and its effects on occlusal outcomes in the management of mandibular fractures. Material and methods: This multicentric prospective study included adult patients with mandibular fractures treated with ORIF. The following data were collected: age, gender, pre-trauma dental status (dentate, partially dentate), cause of injury, fracture site, associated facial fractures, surgical approach, type of ORIF (rigid, non-rigid or mixed), thickness and number of plates, modality of intraoperative MMF (arch bars, self-tapping and self-drilling screws [STSDSs], manual, other) and duration of postoperative MMF. The primary outcome was malocclusion at 6 weeks and 3 months. Statistical analyses were performed with Fisher's exact test or chi-square test, as appropriate. Results: Between 1 May 2021 and 30 April 2022, 336 patients, 264 males and 72 females (median age, 28 years) with mandibular fractures (194 single, 124 double and 18 triple fractures) were hospitalized. Intraoperative MMF was performed in all patients. Osteosynthesis was rigid in 75% of single fractures, and rigid or mixed in 85% and 100% of double and triple fractures, respectively. Excluding patients who underwent manual reduction, postoperative MMF (median duration, 3 weeks) was performed in 140 (64%) patients, without differences by type or number of fractures (p &gt; 0.05). No significant difference was found in the incidence of malocclusion in patients with postoperative MMF (5%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2-10%) compared to those without (4%; 95% IC, 1-11%) (p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: Postoperative MMF was performed in more than half of the patients despite adequate fracture osteosynthesis, with wide variability among centers. No evidence of a reduction in the incidence of postoperative malocclusion in patients treated with postoperative MMF was found.</p