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

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

European Maxillofacial Trauma (EURMAT) project:a multicentre and prospective study

The purpose of this study was to analyse the demographics, causes and characteristics of maxillofacial fractures managed at several European departments of oral and maxillofacial surgery over one year. The following data were recorded: gender, age, aetiology, site of facial fractures, facial injury severity score, timing of intervention, length of hospital stay. Data for a total of 3396 patients (2655 males and 741 females) with 4155 fractures were recorded. The mean age differed from country to country, ranging between 29.9 and 43.9 years. Overall, the most frequent cause of injury was assault, which accounted for the injuries of 1309 patients; assaults and falls alternated as the most important aetiological factor in the various centres. The most frequently observed fracture involved the mandible with 1743 fractures, followed by orbital-zygomatic-maxillary (OZM) fractures. Condylar fractures were the most commonly observed mandibular fracture. The results of the EURMAT collaboration confirm the changing trend in maxillofacial trauma epidemiology in Europe, with trauma cases caused by assaults and falls now outnumbering those due to road traffic accidents. The progressive ageing of the European population, in addition to strict road and work legislation may have been responsible for this change. Men are still the most frequent victims of maxillofacial injuries

Assault-related maxillofacial injuries:the results from the European Maxillofacial Trauma (EURMAT) multicenter and prospective collaboration

Objective. The aim of this study is to present and discuss the demographic characteristics and patterns of assault-related maxillofacial fractures as reported by a European multicenter prospective study. Study Design. Demographic and injury data were recorded for each patient who was a victim of an assault. Results. Assaults represented the most frequent etiology of maxillofacial trauma with an overall rate of 39% and the values ranging between 60.8% (Kiev, Ukraine) and 15.4% (Bergen, Norway). The most frequent mechanisms of assault-related maxillofacial fractures were fists in 730 cases, followed by kicks and fists. The most frequently observed fracture involved the mandible (814 fractures), followed by orbito-zygomatic-maxillary complex fractures and orbital fractures. Conclusions. Our data confirmed the strong possibility that patients with maxillofacial fractures may be victims of physical aggression. The crucial role of alcohol in assault-related fractures was also confirmed by our study