Traditional methods vs rigid internal fixation of mandible fractures

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

27 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare traditional methods (ie, intermaxillary fixation with interosseous wiring or external fixation) with newer techniques (ie, plating, use of lag screws) of open reduction and fixation of mandible fractures. Design: Retrospective analysis of data from medical records. Setting: Academic urban medical center. Patients: Nonrandomized sample of 356 patients admitted to the hospital for treatment of mandible fractures from 1987 through 1991; 155 patients treated with open reduction and fixation were studied. Interventions: Sixty-nine patients were treated with interosseous wire fixation or external fixation, 86 patients with rigid internal fixation. Main Outcome Measures: Presence of infection, nerve impairment, nonunion, malunion, operative time, and follow-up. Results: No significant difference was noted between the two groups for sex, treating service, delay in presentation, antibiotic coverage, mechanism of injury, or type of fracture. The incidence of infection, nerve injury, and unavailability for follow-up were greater in patients treated by the newer techniques. Overall expense and operative time were greater in the group treated with plates and lag screws. Conclusions: We advocate traditional techniques for patients with mandible fractures requiring open reduction and fixation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)750-753
Number of pages4
JournalArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
Volume121
Issue number7
StatePublished - 1995

Fingerprint

Internal Fracture Fixation
Mandible
Operative Time
Fracture Fixation
Wounds and Injuries
Infection
Medical Records
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Traditional methods vs rigid internal fixation of mandible fractures. / Leach, J.; Truelson, J.

In: Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 121, No. 7, 1995, p. 750-753.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4bc399f172b648929538467e408cae55,
title = "Traditional methods vs rigid internal fixation of mandible fractures",
abstract = "Objective: To compare traditional methods (ie, intermaxillary fixation with interosseous wiring or external fixation) with newer techniques (ie, plating, use of lag screws) of open reduction and fixation of mandible fractures. Design: Retrospective analysis of data from medical records. Setting: Academic urban medical center. Patients: Nonrandomized sample of 356 patients admitted to the hospital for treatment of mandible fractures from 1987 through 1991; 155 patients treated with open reduction and fixation were studied. Interventions: Sixty-nine patients were treated with interosseous wire fixation or external fixation, 86 patients with rigid internal fixation. Main Outcome Measures: Presence of infection, nerve impairment, nonunion, malunion, operative time, and follow-up. Results: No significant difference was noted between the two groups for sex, treating service, delay in presentation, antibiotic coverage, mechanism of injury, or type of fracture. The incidence of infection, nerve injury, and unavailability for follow-up were greater in patients treated by the newer techniques. Overall expense and operative time were greater in the group treated with plates and lag screws. Conclusions: We advocate traditional techniques for patients with mandible fractures requiring open reduction and fixation.",
author = "J. Leach and J. Truelson",
year = "1995",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "121",
pages = "750--753",
journal = "JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery",
issn = "2168-6181",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Traditional methods vs rigid internal fixation of mandible fractures

AU - Leach, J.

AU - Truelson, J.

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Objective: To compare traditional methods (ie, intermaxillary fixation with interosseous wiring or external fixation) with newer techniques (ie, plating, use of lag screws) of open reduction and fixation of mandible fractures. Design: Retrospective analysis of data from medical records. Setting: Academic urban medical center. Patients: Nonrandomized sample of 356 patients admitted to the hospital for treatment of mandible fractures from 1987 through 1991; 155 patients treated with open reduction and fixation were studied. Interventions: Sixty-nine patients were treated with interosseous wire fixation or external fixation, 86 patients with rigid internal fixation. Main Outcome Measures: Presence of infection, nerve impairment, nonunion, malunion, operative time, and follow-up. Results: No significant difference was noted between the two groups for sex, treating service, delay in presentation, antibiotic coverage, mechanism of injury, or type of fracture. The incidence of infection, nerve injury, and unavailability for follow-up were greater in patients treated by the newer techniques. Overall expense and operative time were greater in the group treated with plates and lag screws. Conclusions: We advocate traditional techniques for patients with mandible fractures requiring open reduction and fixation.

AB - Objective: To compare traditional methods (ie, intermaxillary fixation with interosseous wiring or external fixation) with newer techniques (ie, plating, use of lag screws) of open reduction and fixation of mandible fractures. Design: Retrospective analysis of data from medical records. Setting: Academic urban medical center. Patients: Nonrandomized sample of 356 patients admitted to the hospital for treatment of mandible fractures from 1987 through 1991; 155 patients treated with open reduction and fixation were studied. Interventions: Sixty-nine patients were treated with interosseous wire fixation or external fixation, 86 patients with rigid internal fixation. Main Outcome Measures: Presence of infection, nerve impairment, nonunion, malunion, operative time, and follow-up. Results: No significant difference was noted between the two groups for sex, treating service, delay in presentation, antibiotic coverage, mechanism of injury, or type of fracture. The incidence of infection, nerve injury, and unavailability for follow-up were greater in patients treated by the newer techniques. Overall expense and operative time were greater in the group treated with plates and lag screws. Conclusions: We advocate traditional techniques for patients with mandible fractures requiring open reduction and fixation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028999272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028999272&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7598851

AN - SCOPUS:0028999272

VL - 121

SP - 750

EP - 753

JO - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

JF - JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery

SN - 2168-6181

IS - 7

ER -