Comparative Study between Open and Closed Reduction in Management of Subcondylar and Ramus Mandibular Fractures | ||||
| Suez Canal University Medical Journal | ||||
| Article 5, Volume 26, Issue 2, February 2023, Page 35-45 PDF (408.06 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/scumj.2023.299512 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Ahmed M. Aboelnaga; Mohamed F. Elsahfy   ; Osama A. Adly; Amr A. Gomaa
| ||||
| Department of Plastic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: Condylar fracture management is often a matter of discussion and controversy among maxillofacial topics and constitutes 11-16% of all facial fractures and 30-40% of mandibular fractures. objective: To improve the outcome after subcondylar and ramus fractures management. Patients and Methods: This study was carried out as a randomized controlled trial. Patients are older than 12 years with subcondylar fractures and exclusion criteria of the previous history of temporo mandibular joint dysfunction, mandibular condylar head, and intracapsular fractures and delay presentation of the fracture after 3 weeks. The study was demonstrated as two groups: Group A =open reduction and internal fixation and group b =closed reduction. Post-intervention assessment was done. Results: We found that there was a statistically significant higher mean maximum interincisal opening among the open reduction group than closed reduction after 2 months of treatment (34.12 SD and 30.22) and 6 months (35.09 and 32.18). Also, there was statistically significantly lower mean lateral excursion among the closed reduction group than open reduction after 2 months of treatment (8.57 & 10.27) and similarly after 6 months (8.91 & 11.5). Conclusion: open reduction is superior to closed reduction in the management of cases of displaced and foreshortened subcondylar fractures. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Open Reduction; Closed Reduction; Subcondylar; Ramus Mandibular Fractures | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 253 PDF Download: 552 |
||||
