Maxillomandibular Fixation: Understanding the Risks and Benefits of Contemporary Techniques in Adults.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Alan Wellington Johnson, Sarah Rathnam Akkina, Scott Eric Bevans
{"title":"Maxillomandibular Fixation: Understanding the Risks and Benefits of Contemporary Techniques in Adults.","authors":"Alan Wellington Johnson, Sarah Rathnam Akkina, Scott Eric Bevans","doi":"10.1089/fpsam.2024.0113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous techniques achieve maxillomandibular fixation (MMF), each with benefits and risks. While using Erich arch bars to achieve MMF has remained the gold standard through the last century, the technique has multiple limitations, which have spurred innovative approaches, such as intermaxillary fixation (IMF) screws, hybrid arch bars, embrasure wires, and dental occlusion ties. The surge in new MMF technologies over the past decade prompted this analysis to compare these techniques. A PubMed search was conducted to identify all current FDA-approved modern MMF technologies from 2005 through 2023, evaluating their advantages and limitations. Studies with controlled scientific comparisons of techniques were limited, precluding a systematic review. Analysis showed no definitive data exist to endorse one technique as a universal option. As multiple MMF options offer appropriate stability, a surgeon may choose an approach based upon numerous factors: comminution/instability; need for physiotherapy, including guiding elastics; safety; time of application/removal; and patient comfort. This article guides the selection between techniques based on these factors and presents a decision algorithm to assist surgeons in selecting the ideal MMF technique for each patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":48487,"journal":{"name":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2024.0113","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Numerous techniques achieve maxillomandibular fixation (MMF), each with benefits and risks. While using Erich arch bars to achieve MMF has remained the gold standard through the last century, the technique has multiple limitations, which have spurred innovative approaches, such as intermaxillary fixation (IMF) screws, hybrid arch bars, embrasure wires, and dental occlusion ties. The surge in new MMF technologies over the past decade prompted this analysis to compare these techniques. A PubMed search was conducted to identify all current FDA-approved modern MMF technologies from 2005 through 2023, evaluating their advantages and limitations. Studies with controlled scientific comparisons of techniques were limited, precluding a systematic review. Analysis showed no definitive data exist to endorse one technique as a universal option. As multiple MMF options offer appropriate stability, a surgeon may choose an approach based upon numerous factors: comminution/instability; need for physiotherapy, including guiding elastics; safety; time of application/removal; and patient comfort. This article guides the selection between techniques based on these factors and presents a decision algorithm to assist surgeons in selecting the ideal MMF technique for each patient.

上下颌固定术:了解当代成人技术的风险和益处。
实现上颌下颌固定(MMF)的技术有很多,每种技术都有其优点和风险。在上个世纪,使用埃里希弓杆实现上颌下颌固定一直是黄金标准,但这种技术存在多种局限性,因此出现了一些创新方法,如上颌间固定(IMF)螺钉、混合弓杆、栓线和牙科咬合系带。过去十年中,MMF 新技术的激增促使我们对这些技术进行分析比较。我们在PubMed上进行了搜索,找出了从2005年到2023年所有获得FDA批准的现代MMF技术,并评估了它们的优势和局限性。对各种技术进行科学对照比较的研究非常有限,因此无法进行系统性审查。分析表明,目前还没有确切的数据可以证明一种技术是普遍的选择。由于多种 MMF 选项都能提供适当的稳定性,外科医生可能会根据多种因素来选择一种方法:粉碎/不稳定性;物理治疗的需要,包括引导弹力;安全性;应用/移除的时间;以及患者的舒适度。本文将指导外科医生根据这些因素选择不同的技术,并介绍一种决策算法,以帮助外科医生为每位患者选择理想的 MMF 技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
30.00%
发文量
159
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信