What Is the Most Stable Fixation Technique for Mandibular Condyle Fracture?

Hisham Marwan, Yoh Sawatari

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Purpose: Mandibular condylar fractures are relatively common fractures, accounting for 29 to 52% of all mandibular fractures. Recently, the debate between closed versus open treatment of the condylar fracture has shifted toward more specific surgical questions concerning the number and pattern of the fixation method for the condylar region. We have attempted to resolve the controversy with the systematic review and meta-analysis. The purpose of the present study was to compare the outcomes of different methods of fixation for mandibular condylar fractures. Materials and Methods: We conducted an electronic database search for clinical studies evaluating the stability of internal fixation of condylar fractures. The search was restricted to studies reported in the English language from January 2000 to July 2018. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement guidelines. Results: The initial search returned 285 studies reported from January 2000 through July 2018. After reviewing the full-text reports, only 16 studies were deemed eligible for the review. The total sample size was 831 patients with mandibular subcondylar fractures. The patients were classified into 25 groups according to the fixation method, follow-up period, use of intermaxillary fixation, and the presence of associated fractures. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that single plate fixation has been associated with more complications with poor outcomes, including hardware failure, screw loosening, and postoperative malocclusion.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Mandibular Condyle
Mandibular Fractures
Meta-Analysis
Internal Fracture Fixation
Malocclusion
Sample Size
Language
Databases
Guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oral Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

What Is the Most Stable Fixation Technique for Mandibular Condyle Fracture? / Marwan, Hisham; Sawatari, Yoh.

In: Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{5c6b172d1dc3458f8d91ab373d0cc221,
title = "What Is the Most Stable Fixation Technique for Mandibular Condyle Fracture?",
abstract = "Purpose: Mandibular condylar fractures are relatively common fractures, accounting for 29 to 52{\%} of all mandibular fractures. Recently, the debate between closed versus open treatment of the condylar fracture has shifted toward more specific surgical questions concerning the number and pattern of the fixation method for the condylar region. We have attempted to resolve the controversy with the systematic review and meta-analysis. The purpose of the present study was to compare the outcomes of different methods of fixation for mandibular condylar fractures. Materials and Methods: We conducted an electronic database search for clinical studies evaluating the stability of internal fixation of condylar fractures. The search was restricted to studies reported in the English language from January 2000 to July 2018. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement guidelines. Results: The initial search returned 285 studies reported from January 2000 through July 2018. After reviewing the full-text reports, only 16 studies were deemed eligible for the review. The total sample size was 831 patients with mandibular subcondylar fractures. The patients were classified into 25 groups according to the fixation method, follow-up period, use of intermaxillary fixation, and the presence of associated fractures. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that single plate fixation has been associated with more complications with poor outcomes, including hardware failure, screw loosening, and postoperative malocclusion.",
author = "Hisham Marwan and Yoh Sawatari",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.joms.2019.07.012",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery",
issn = "0278-2391",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What Is the Most Stable Fixation Technique for Mandibular Condyle Fracture?

AU - Marwan, Hisham

AU - Sawatari, Yoh

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Mandibular condylar fractures are relatively common fractures, accounting for 29 to 52% of all mandibular fractures. Recently, the debate between closed versus open treatment of the condylar fracture has shifted toward more specific surgical questions concerning the number and pattern of the fixation method for the condylar region. We have attempted to resolve the controversy with the systematic review and meta-analysis. The purpose of the present study was to compare the outcomes of different methods of fixation for mandibular condylar fractures. Materials and Methods: We conducted an electronic database search for clinical studies evaluating the stability of internal fixation of condylar fractures. The search was restricted to studies reported in the English language from January 2000 to July 2018. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement guidelines. Results: The initial search returned 285 studies reported from January 2000 through July 2018. After reviewing the full-text reports, only 16 studies were deemed eligible for the review. The total sample size was 831 patients with mandibular subcondylar fractures. The patients were classified into 25 groups according to the fixation method, follow-up period, use of intermaxillary fixation, and the presence of associated fractures. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that single plate fixation has been associated with more complications with poor outcomes, including hardware failure, screw loosening, and postoperative malocclusion.

AB - Purpose: Mandibular condylar fractures are relatively common fractures, accounting for 29 to 52% of all mandibular fractures. Recently, the debate between closed versus open treatment of the condylar fracture has shifted toward more specific surgical questions concerning the number and pattern of the fixation method for the condylar region. We have attempted to resolve the controversy with the systematic review and meta-analysis. The purpose of the present study was to compare the outcomes of different methods of fixation for mandibular condylar fractures. Materials and Methods: We conducted an electronic database search for clinical studies evaluating the stability of internal fixation of condylar fractures. The search was restricted to studies reported in the English language from January 2000 to July 2018. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement guidelines. Results: The initial search returned 285 studies reported from January 2000 through July 2018. After reviewing the full-text reports, only 16 studies were deemed eligible for the review. The total sample size was 831 patients with mandibular subcondylar fractures. The patients were classified into 25 groups according to the fixation method, follow-up period, use of intermaxillary fixation, and the presence of associated fractures. Conclusions: The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that single plate fixation has been associated with more complications with poor outcomes, including hardware failure, screw loosening, and postoperative malocclusion.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072292064&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072292064&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.joms.2019.07.012

DO - 10.1016/j.joms.2019.07.012

M3 - Review article

JO - Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

JF - Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

SN - 0278-2391

ER -