H. Saluja, Shivani Sachdeva, Seemit Shah, A. Dadhich, Mukund Singh, Sumeet Mishra
{"title":"Ten-year review of facial bone fractures in rural population at a teaching institute in Central India (Maharashtra)","authors":"H. Saluja, Shivani Sachdeva, Seemit Shah, A. Dadhich, Mukund Singh, Sumeet Mishra","doi":"10.4103/jhnps.jhnps_22_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this study was to review the incidence and characteristics of maxillofacial fractures in Loni (rural population) and compare them with the existing literature. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of patients' records and radiographs was reviewed during the 10-year period between 2007 and 2017. Statistical analysis was carried out according to age, gender, cause of accident, and fracture site. Results: A total of 1943 cases with 2470 injuries were reviewed during the 10-year period. The age of patients ranged from 0 to 70 years. The ratio of men to women was 3.5:1. Most fractures were caused by road traffic accident (44.12%), followed by fall (26.76%), assault (25.06%), and animal injuries (4.06%). The prevalent anatomic regions of isolated fractures were the mandible (50.64%), followed by Zygomatic complex (ZMC) (9.26%), Le Fort II (4.07%), Le Fort I (3.50%), orbital floor (3.07%), Le Fort III (2.23%), dentoalveolar (1.39%), zygomatic arch (1.13%), and nasal bone (0.77%). In combination fractures, the most common were the midface combinations (12.55%), followed by mandibular and midface combinations (6.13%), mandibular combination fractures (3.25%), and midface and frontal bone fractures (1.444%). Conclusion: The findings of this study compared with similar studies reported in literature support the view that the cause and incidence of maxillofacial injuries vary from one country to another. Animal injury was one of the causes for maxillofacial trauma because of rural location of our center.","PeriodicalId":41774,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Head & Neck Physicians and Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Head & Neck Physicians and Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jhnps.jhnps_22_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to review the incidence and characteristics of maxillofacial fractures in Loni (rural population) and compare them with the existing literature. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of patients' records and radiographs was reviewed during the 10-year period between 2007 and 2017. Statistical analysis was carried out according to age, gender, cause of accident, and fracture site. Results: A total of 1943 cases with 2470 injuries were reviewed during the 10-year period. The age of patients ranged from 0 to 70 years. The ratio of men to women was 3.5:1. Most fractures were caused by road traffic accident (44.12%), followed by fall (26.76%), assault (25.06%), and animal injuries (4.06%). The prevalent anatomic regions of isolated fractures were the mandible (50.64%), followed by Zygomatic complex (ZMC) (9.26%), Le Fort II (4.07%), Le Fort I (3.50%), orbital floor (3.07%), Le Fort III (2.23%), dentoalveolar (1.39%), zygomatic arch (1.13%), and nasal bone (0.77%). In combination fractures, the most common were the midface combinations (12.55%), followed by mandibular and midface combinations (6.13%), mandibular combination fractures (3.25%), and midface and frontal bone fractures (1.444%). Conclusion: The findings of this study compared with similar studies reported in literature support the view that the cause and incidence of maxillofacial injuries vary from one country to another. Animal injury was one of the causes for maxillofacial trauma because of rural location of our center.
目的:本研究旨在回顾Loni(农村人口)颌面部骨折的发生率和特点,并与现有文献进行比较。材料和方法:回顾性研究了2007年至2017年10年间的患者记录和射线照片。根据年龄、性别、事故原因和骨折部位进行统计分析。结果:在10年的时间里,共回顾了1943例2470人受伤的病例。患者年龄0~70岁。男女比例为3.5:1。大多数骨折是由道路交通事故引起的(44.12%),其次是跌倒(26.76%)、袭击(25.06%)和动物损伤(4.06%)。孤立性骨折的常见解剖区域是下颌骨(50.64%),其次为颧骨复合体(ZMC)(9.26%)、Le Fort II(4.07%)、,在组合骨折中,最常见的是面中部组合骨折(12.55%),其次是下颌和面中部组合(6.13%),下颌组合骨折(3.25%),以及面中部和额骨骨折(1.444%)。结论:与文献中报道的类似研究相比,本研究的结果支持了颌面部损伤的原因和发生率因国家而异的观点。动物损伤是颌面部创伤的原因之一,因为我们中心位于农村。