Comparison of Three Corner Flap with Vestibular Incision in the Management of Mandibular Body Fractures

Muhammad Ramzan Adeel; Saad  Mahmood; Muhammad  Afzal; Naseer Ahmed  Kakar; Nazish .; Zahra Saeed  Sethi

doi:10.51253/pafmj.v75iSUPPL-7.10559

Authors

Muhammad Ramzan Adeel Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 30 MDC, Combined Military Hospital Peshawar/ National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Saad Mahmood Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Combined Military Hospital Multan/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Muhammad Afzal Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 30 MDC, Combined Military Hospital Peshawar/ National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Naseer Ahmed Kakar Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/ National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Nazish . Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/ National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
Zahra Saeed Sethi Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry Rawalpindi/ National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v75iSUPPL-7.10559

Keywords:

Mandibular body, Neuro sensory disturbance, Three Corner Flap, Vestibular incision,

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the three corner flap with vestibular incision in order to approach mandibular body fractures in terms of frequency of post-operative neurosensory disturbance in directional sense and mean post-operative mouth opening at 1st and 3rd post-operative day.

Study Design: Quasi experimental study.

Place and Duration of Study: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi Pakistan from Aug 2020 to Jan 2021.

Methodology: A total of 72 patients, 36 in each group were enrolled in the study after getting consent. The patients were selected according to inclusion criteria and samples were assigned to two groups. All the procedures were performed by same classified oral and maxillofacial surgeon, and the patients were evaluated on 1st and 3rd postoperative day where postoperative mouth opening was measured as inter incisal distance in millimeters on asking patients to open mouth maximally.

Results: In Group-A (three corner flap group) mean inter-incisal mouth opening at day 1 was 42.10±1.85 mm and at day 3 it was 42.80 ± 1.14 mm. Whereas in Group-B (vestibular incision group) mean inter-incisal mouth opening at day 1 was 35.80± 1.44 mm and at day 3 it was 41.55 ±1.36 mm. The frequency of post-operative neurosensory disturbance in Group-A at day 1 was 16.7% and at day 3 it was 11.1%. Whereas in Group-B frequency of neurosensory disturbance at day 1 was 66.7% and at day 3 it was 55.6%.

Conclusion: Three corner flap is a preferred method to approach mandibular body fractures in ..

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Moradi A, Hosseini SM. Evaluation of correlation between lower jaw and lip rate of paresthesia and inferior alveolar canal diameter changes after mandibular fracture. Biosci Biotech Res Comm.2017; 2: 39-45.

2. Burns B, Fields JM, Farinas A, Pollins A, Perdikis G, Thayer W. Comparing maximal forces in resorbable poly-L-lactic acid and titanium plates for mandibular fracture fixation. Heliyon. 2020; 6(4): e03705.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03705

3. Abosadegh MM, Saddki N, Al-Tayar B, Rahman SA. Epidemiology of Maxillofacial Fractures at a Teaching Hospital in Malaysia: A Retrospective Study. Biomed Res Int 2019 Feb; 2019: 9024763

https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9024763

4. Miguens-Jr SA, Borges TS, Dietrich LA, Oliveira MC, Hernandez PA, Kramer PF. A retrospective study of oral and maxillofacial injuries in an emergency hospital in Southern Brazil. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2016 30; 16(1): 339-350.

5. Rashid S, Kundi JA, Sarfraz A, Qureshi AU, Khan A. Patterns of mandibular fractures and associated comorbidities in Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Cureus 2019; 11: e5753.

https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.5753

6. Ahmed S, Usmani RV, Shaikh AH, Iqbal N, Hassan SMU, Ali A. Patterns and presentation of mandibular fractures in Dow International Dental College: Five-year review. Professional Med J 2018; 25: 1596-1599.

https://doi.org/10.29309/TPMJ/18.4574

7. Zaky MM, Fayed NA, Shehab MF. Comparison of biting force when using a combination of one microplate and one miniplate versus two miniplates for fixation of parasymphyseal mandibular fracture: the use of microplates for parasymphyseal mandibular fracture. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019; 24: 19-24.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-019-00810-0

8. Datarkar A, Tayal S, Thote A, Galie M. An in-vitro evaluation of a novel design of miniplate for fixation of fracture segments in the transition zone of parasymphysis-body region of mandible using finite element analysis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2019; 47: 99-105.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2018.11.004

9. Balasubramanian S, Paneerselvam E, Gopi G, Nakkeeran KP, Sharma AR, Raja VBK. Comparison of two incisions for open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular body fractures: A randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating surgical outcome. Chines J Traumatol 2019; 22: 34-40.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2018.11.002

10. Anyanechi CE, Saheeb BD. Inflammatory morbidity due to compound mandibular body fractures: does it have a relationship with treatment outcome? Med Princ Pract 2015; 24: 238–243.

https://doi.org/10.1159/000376581

11. Jiménez-Martínez E, Gasco-García C, Arrieta-Blanco JJ, Gomez del Torno J, Bartolome Villar B. Study of the analgesic efficacy of Dexketoprofen Trometamol 25mg vs. Ibuprofen 600mg after their administration in patients subjected to oral surgery. Med Oral 2004; 9: 143e148.

12. Song Q, Li S, Patil PM. Inferior alveolar and mental nerve injuries associated with open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular fractures: A Seven Year retrospective study. J Cranio-MaxilloFac Surg. 2014; 1-4.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.03.029

13. Tay ABG, Lai JB, Lye KW, Wong WY, Nadkarni NV, Li W, Bautista D, Inferior alveolar nerve injury in trauma-induced mandible fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015; 10: 1016-1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2015.02.003

14. Buch, K, Mottalib, A, Nadgir, R.N, et al. Unifocal versus multifocal mandibular fractures and injury location. Emerg Radio 2016; 23: 161–167.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-015-1375-9

15. Gadicherla S, Sasikumar P, Gill SS, Bhagania M, Kamath AT, Pentapati KC. Mandibular fractures and associated factors at a tertiary care hospital. Arch Trauma Res 2016 ; 5(4): e30574. https://doi.org/10.5812/atr.30574

16. Goodday RH. Management of fractures of the mandibular body and symphysis. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2013; 25(4): 601-616.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2013.07.002

17. N CS, Shetty SK, Shetty SK, Shah AK. Inferior alveolar nerve dysfunction in mandibular fractures: a prospective cohort study. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2021 ; 47(3): 183-189.

https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2021.47.3.183

18. Cillo JE Jr, Godwin S, Becker E, Schorr R. Neurosensory recovery following mental nerve skeletonization in intraoral open reduction and internal fixation of mandible fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2021; 79(1): 183-191.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2020.08.027