View
217
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
B E T H A N J O N E S
Management of MandibularFracture
Classification of fracture
Simple/Closed – does not produce wound to externalenvironment.
Compound/Open – external wound communicateswith the fracture.
Comminuted – bone is splintered/crushed Greenstick – one cortex of bone is fractures and the
other is bent. Pathologic – due to pre-existing bone disease Multiple – >2 fracture lines that do not communicate. Impacted – one fragment driven firmly into the other. Atrophic – due to severe atrophy e.g. edentulous. Indirect – distant from site of injury.
Classification of region of fracture
Symphysis – region of central incisors through toinferior border of mandible.
Parasymphyseal – vertical and distal to the canines. Body – from distal symphysis alveolar border of
masseter muscle. Angle – Triangular region bounded by masseter
muscle. Ramus – superior to the angle with apex at sigmoid
notch. Coronoid – fracture of coronoid process. Alveolar – region usually containing teeth. Condylar .
Incidence
Up to 70% of all maxillofacial fractures. Increased incidence in Males aged 21-30yrs 29% Body 26% Condylar 25% Angle 17% Symphysis 4% Ramus 1% Coronoid process
History & Examination
History of incident Lacerations/swelling/haematoma Palpation - step deformity/tenderness Paraesthesia/dysaesthesia/anaesthesia of IDN. TMJ examination - Condyle # ? Deviation/trismus Altered occlusion Sublingual hematoma
CASE C.D.
Hx – allegded assault – punch to R side of face. Lacerations – nil Swelling – R angle of mandible Haematoma – extraoral/sublingual – nil Palpation- No obvious step deformity, tender R angle
and L parasymphysis. Paraesthesia – nil TMJ – trismus – 2fingers Occlusion - altered
Investigation – PA Mandible
OPT
Management
Clerk patient for theatre – NBM Meds – IV antibiotics (co-amoxiclav) and strong
analgesics. Consent –
Procedure – ORIF +/- IMF +/- extractions Reason – to allow for function Risk – Pain, Swelling, Bleeding, Bruising, Infection , numbness
of lip/tongue, permanent/temporary.
Treatment
Conservative Treatment Fracture undisplaced.Analgesia, Antibiotics, Soft diet, OHI, follow up. Active TreatmentReduction open/closedFixation ImmobilisationRehabilitation
Closed reduction
Non-displaced favourable fractures Grossly comminuted fractures- reduce stripping of
periosteum Children in developing dentition Coronoid fractures unless impingement on zygoma Condylar fractures Indirect fixation - IMF.
IMF
Archbars –Prefabricated – requires adjustmentCustom made
Intraoral bone Screws – IMF screws(wire/elastic fixation)
High level of success – simple technique and reducedoperative time.
Schnieder et al 2000 – 100% accurate occlusion and adequatehealing post treatment.
Bissada et al 2011 – 97.25% Normal occlusion post treatment.
Complications – Root fracture/impingment Nerve injury Screw/wire loosening Screw lose Potential for infection
Open reduction with internal fixation.
Displaced unfavourable fractures Severely atrophic edentulous mandibles – ORIF with
rigid fixation +/- bone graft. Complex facial fractures Mandibular non-unions / malunions Condylar fractures.
Fixation
Direct Reconstruction plates Bone plates and screws
Load bearing osteosynthesis:
Locking reconstruction plate – bears 100% functional forceat fracture site.
Atrophic/edentulous/comminuted/defect fractures
Load sharing Osteosynthesis
Ideally bone assumes most functional loads Champy Miniplate fixation along lines of
ideal osteosynthesis.AKA functionallyadequate / semi rigid fixation
Works with principles ofbiomechanics ofmandible.
Favourable / Unfavourable
Effect of muscle pull on fracture fragments. Vertically/Horizontally Favourable/unfavourable Unfavourable – fragments more likely displaced Favourable – muscle pulls stabilises fracture.
Biomechanics of Mandible
Zones of tension and compression from functionalforces – location of bite force and insertion ofmuscles mastication.
Hunting bow – strongest at symphysis, weakest atcondyles.
Load sharing osteosynthesis:
Created by frictional resistance at bone ends – requiresadequate bony buttressing at fracture therefore cant be usedfor defect fractures.
Bone assumes most of functional force Lag technique – compression of fracture – screw must be
perpendicular to #, overdrill near cortex so that threadsengage only the far cortex = COMPRESSION
Not suitable for comminuted #
Compression plating : forces of masticationovercome by plate and bony buttressing.
Requires excellent bony buttressing Screws tightened down ramped hole- bringing
fracture segments together. Usually used in addition with miniplate to align
and stabilize fracture.
Extraction of teeth within the line of fracture
CONTROVERSIAL Neal et al 1978 – no statistical difference whether
teeth in line of fracture were extracted or retained. Amaratunga 1987 – concluded no significant
difference in between number of complications innon-infected teeth removed/ retained
Shetty and Freymiller 1989 – reviewed literature
Indications for extraction of teeth within fractureline
Tooth luxated from socket / interfering withreduction of fracture.
Tooth is fractured / mobile. Tooth pathology - decayed or has periodontal
disease, cyst, pericoronitis
Indications to leave tooth within fracture line
Tooth does not interfere with reduction/fixation. If removal compromises fracture site for fixation i.e
excess bone removal. Tooth in good condition and aids in establishing
occlusion. Conserve if possible
Post-op Radiographs
Post – op Radiographs
Post -op
Occlusion normal. Trismus, pain and swelling still present Instruction –
Soft ‘no-chew’ diet Avoid contact sports or heavy lifting ABX for 7days Analgesia
Rv 1 week – minimal swelling, trismus improving, nopain.
Further 2 week rv – discharge.
Summery
Examination and history Requires two radiographic veiws Antibiotics Adequate reduction to allow for function SOFT diet Review
REFERENCES
Mandibular Fractures -Donald R Laub Jr, MD, FACS Professor,Departments of Surgery and Pediatrics, University of Vermont College of Medicine;Interim Chief of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Fletcher-Allen Health Care
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3670563/Management-of-Mandibular-Fracture Indications for open reduction of mandIbular condyle fractures, M Zide+ J Kent,
Journal of Oral and maxillofacial surgery, Vol 41, issue 2, 88-89 1983 Spiessl B, Schroll K. Gelenkfortsatz und gelenkkopfchenfracturen. In: Higst H,
editor. Spezielle frakture und luxationslehre. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1972 [BD. I/I]. Mandibular Reconstruction, Plating -Jesse E Smith, MD Consulting Staff,
Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Otolaryngology-Head andNeck Surgery, John Peter Smith Hospital
Intermaxillary screw fixation in mandibular fracture repair. Bissada E,Abou-Chacra Z, Ahmarani C, Poirier J, Rahal AJ Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg.
http://www2.aofoundation.org http://emedicine.medscape.com/article
References
Neal DC, Wagner WF, Alpert B. Morbidity associatedwith teeth in the line of mandibular fractures. J OralSurg. Nov 1978;36(11):859-62
e Amaratunga NA. The effect of teeth in the line ofmandibular fractures on healing. J Oral MaxillofacSurg. Apr 1987;45(4):312-4.
Shetty V, Freymiller E. Teeth in the line of fracture: areview. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. Dec1989;47(12):1303-6
Mandibular Fractures laub et al –medscape.com
Recommended