Transparotid and Submandibular Approaches to Condylar Fracture Repair: Comparison of Outcomes.

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Mo Alabdoulsalam, James Brady
{"title":"Transparotid and Submandibular Approaches to Condylar Fracture Repair: Comparison of Outcomes.","authors":"Mo Alabdoulsalam, James Brady","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Although condylar fractures are common in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery, the approach to their treatment is not straightforward. Multiple soft-tissue approaches are available, but it is unclear which yields the best outcomes. In this retrospective study, we aimed to determine whether a transparotid or submandibular soft-tissue approach to treating condylar fractures yields better outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study consisted of a retrospective chart audit and an in-person assessment. The chart audit involved all patients who presented to the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre (Halifax) between 2012 and 2022 with condylar fracture treated with open reduction and internal fixation. The chart review assessed each patient's maximum interincisal opening, paresthesia, nerve function, infection and occlusion. The in-person assessment further assessed scar satisfaction, overall patient satisfaction with the treatment process and cosmetic results, and the incidence of Frey syndrome. Outcomes with the transparotid and submandibular approaches were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the χ<sup>2</sup> or Fisher exact test for categorical variables, with significance level set at p < 0.05 (2-tailed).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were collected from the charts of 32 patients who met the eligibility criteria during the study period; 14 of these patients also underwent an in-person assessment (at 1 to 7 years after the surgery). Statistical analysis of data from the chart audit and in-person assessment suggested no difference between the 2 approaches in terms of surgical outcomes after condylar fractures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The optimal approach for treatment of condylar fractures should be determined individually, based on the surgeon's preference, fracture location and extent of the fracture.</p>","PeriodicalId":50005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Canadian Dental Association","volume":"91 ","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Canadian Dental Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Although condylar fractures are common in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery, the approach to their treatment is not straightforward. Multiple soft-tissue approaches are available, but it is unclear which yields the best outcomes. In this retrospective study, we aimed to determine whether a transparotid or submandibular soft-tissue approach to treating condylar fractures yields better outcomes.

Methods: This study consisted of a retrospective chart audit and an in-person assessment. The chart audit involved all patients who presented to the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre (Halifax) between 2012 and 2022 with condylar fracture treated with open reduction and internal fixation. The chart review assessed each patient's maximum interincisal opening, paresthesia, nerve function, infection and occlusion. The in-person assessment further assessed scar satisfaction, overall patient satisfaction with the treatment process and cosmetic results, and the incidence of Frey syndrome. Outcomes with the transparotid and submandibular approaches were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the χ2 or Fisher exact test for categorical variables, with significance level set at p < 0.05 (2-tailed).

Results: Data were collected from the charts of 32 patients who met the eligibility criteria during the study period; 14 of these patients also underwent an in-person assessment (at 1 to 7 years after the surgery). Statistical analysis of data from the chart audit and in-person assessment suggested no difference between the 2 approaches in terms of surgical outcomes after condylar fractures.

Conclusion: The optimal approach for treatment of condylar fractures should be determined individually, based on the surgeon's preference, fracture location and extent of the fracture.

经蝶骨和下颌下入路治疗髁突骨折的疗效比较。
简介:虽然髁突骨折在口腔颌面外科领域很常见,但其治疗方法并不简单。有多种软组织手术方法可供选择,但目前尚不清楚哪一种手术效果最好。在这项回顾性研究中,我们的目的是确定经椎骨或下颌下软组织入路治疗髁突骨折的效果是否更好。方法:本研究包括回顾性图表审核和现场评估。图表审计涉及2012年至2022年期间就诊于伊丽莎白女王二世健康科学中心(Halifax)的髁突骨折切开复位内固定治疗的所有患者。评估每位患者的最大内脏开口、感觉异常、神经功能、感染和闭塞。现场评估进一步评估疤痕满意度、患者对治疗过程和美容结果的总体满意度以及Frey综合征的发生率。采用连续变量的Mann-Whitney U检验和分类变量的χ2或Fisher精确检验进行比较,显著性水平设置为p < 0.05(双尾)。结果:从研究期间符合资格标准的32例患者的图表中收集数据;其中14例患者还接受了当面评估(手术后1至7年)。图表审核和现场评估数据的统计分析表明,两种入路在髁突骨折后的手术结果方面没有差异。结论:治疗髁突骨折的最佳入路应根据术者的喜好、骨折的位置和骨折的程度而定。
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
Journal of the Canadian Dental Association
Journal of the Canadian Dental Association 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: JCDA.ca (Journal of the Canadian Dental Association) is the flagship scholarly, peer-reviewed publication of CDA, providing dialogue between the national association and the dental community. It is dedicated to publishing worthy scientific and clinical articles and informing dentists of issues significant to the profession. CDA has focused its recent efforts on knowledge, advocacy and practice support initiatives and JCDA.ca is an essential part of CDA''s knowledge strategy.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书