Revision Surgery With Refixation After Mandibular Fractures.

Q4 Social Sciences
Whitehall Papers Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-05 DOI:10.1177/19433875231179318
Claudius Steffen, Margrit Welter, Heilwig Fischer, Maximilian Goedecke, Christian Doll, Steffen Koerdt, Kilian Kreutzer, Max Heiland, Carsten Rendenbach, Jan O Voss
{"title":"Revision Surgery With Refixation After Mandibular Fractures.","authors":"Claudius Steffen, Margrit Welter, Heilwig Fischer, Maximilian Goedecke, Christian Doll, Steffen Koerdt, Kilian Kreutzer, Max Heiland, Carsten Rendenbach, Jan O Voss","doi":"10.1177/19433875231179318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective, descriptive observational study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The need for revision surgery after mandibular fractures is an indicator for severe postoperative complications. This study aimed to characterise this patient cohort, describe solutions to deal with complications and evaluate treatment quality as a risk variable for complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with revision surgery with refixation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a mandible fracture were included. Patient- and therapy-specific information were assessed together with postoperative complications. The quality of fixation was evaluated individually by 6 specialists. Interobserver agreement was analysed using Fleiss' kappa.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 630 patients, inclusion criteria were met by 17 patients (14 male, 3 female) with an average age of 43.3 (±15.5) years. Complications at the mandible body/angle/symphysis led to refixation in all cases. Main indications for refixation were osteomyelitis (52.9%) or pseudarthrosis (41.2%). Risk factors were drug-related immune suppression, local infection or substance abuse (nicotine, alcohol or drugs). Six patients did not present any of these predictors. Of these, treatment of 4 patients was rated as not in accordance to the AO principles. The interrater reliability of treatment quality assessments was .239.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with risk factors need to be carefully observed perioperatively after ORIF of mandibular fractures and treatments need to be adapted to these patients. Discrepancies of treatments to common guidelines may also be an independent predictor for treatment failure in patients without risk factors. Current treatment guidelines should be re-evaluated concerning additional treatment strategies for patients with specific risk factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":37791,"journal":{"name":"Whitehall Papers","volume":"74 1","pages":"214-224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11425749/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Whitehall Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19433875231179318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective, descriptive observational study.

Objective: The need for revision surgery after mandibular fractures is an indicator for severe postoperative complications. This study aimed to characterise this patient cohort, describe solutions to deal with complications and evaluate treatment quality as a risk variable for complications.

Methods: Patients with revision surgery with refixation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of a mandible fracture were included. Patient- and therapy-specific information were assessed together with postoperative complications. The quality of fixation was evaluated individually by 6 specialists. Interobserver agreement was analysed using Fleiss' kappa.

Results: Out of 630 patients, inclusion criteria were met by 17 patients (14 male, 3 female) with an average age of 43.3 (±15.5) years. Complications at the mandible body/angle/symphysis led to refixation in all cases. Main indications for refixation were osteomyelitis (52.9%) or pseudarthrosis (41.2%). Risk factors were drug-related immune suppression, local infection or substance abuse (nicotine, alcohol or drugs). Six patients did not present any of these predictors. Of these, treatment of 4 patients was rated as not in accordance to the AO principles. The interrater reliability of treatment quality assessments was .239.

Conclusions: Patients with risk factors need to be carefully observed perioperatively after ORIF of mandibular fractures and treatments need to be adapted to these patients. Discrepancies of treatments to common guidelines may also be an independent predictor for treatment failure in patients without risk factors. Current treatment guidelines should be re-evaluated concerning additional treatment strategies for patients with specific risk factors.

下颌骨骨折后的复位翻修手术
研究设计回顾性、描述性观察研究:下颌骨骨折后需要进行翻修手术是严重术后并发症的一个指标。本研究旨在描述这一患者群体的特征,描述处理并发症的解决方案,并评估作为并发症风险变量的治疗质量:方法:纳入下颌骨骨折开放复位内固定术(ORIF)后进行翻修手术并复位的患者。方法:纳入下颌骨骨折切开复位内固定术(ORIF)后进行翻修手术并再固定的患者,同时评估患者和治疗方法的具体信息以及术后并发症。固定质量由 6 位专家分别进行评估。采用弗莱斯卡帕法分析观察者之间的一致性:在 630 名患者中,符合纳入标准的有 17 名(14 名男性,3 名女性),平均年龄为 43.3 (±15.5) 岁。所有病例均因下颌骨体/角/干骺端并发症而接受了复位手术。重新固定的主要适应症是骨髓炎(52.9%)或假关节(41.2%)。风险因素包括与药物相关的免疫抑制、局部感染或药物滥用(尼古丁、酒精或毒品)。有 6 名患者不存在上述任何预测因素。其中,4 名患者的治疗被评为不符合 AO 原则。治疗质量评估的交互可靠性为 0.239:下颌骨骨折 ORIF 术后围术期需要仔细观察有风险因素的患者,并根据这些患者的情况调整治疗方法。治疗方法与通用指南不一致也可能是导致无危险因素患者治疗失败的独立预测因素。应重新评估当前的治疗指南,为具有特定风险因素的患者制定额外的治疗策略。
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
Whitehall Papers
Whitehall Papers Social Sciences-Archeology
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: The Whitehall Paper series provides in-depth studies of specific developments, issues or themes in the field of national and international defence and security. Published three times a year, Whitehall Papers reflect the highest standards of original research and analysis, and are invaluable background material for policy-makers and specialists alike.
×
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