{"title":"下颌骨角骨折的固定方式是单微型钢板还是双微型钢板?单盲比较研究。","authors":"Gaurav Khemka, Nitin Bhola, Anendd Jadhav, Rajiv Borle, Anuj Jain, Shruti Dalmia","doi":"10.4103/njms.njms_10_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mandibular angle fractures constitute a significant proportion (23%-42%) of all mandibular fractures. A persistent controversy surrounds the optimal approach for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures: whether to employ a single miniplate or two miniplates. This study aims to assess the comparative efficacy of employing a single miniplate versus two miniplates for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Twenty male patients diagnosed with mandibular angle fractures were randomly assigned to either group I or group II. Group I received treatment with a single miniplate positioned at the superior border, while group II underwent fixation with two miniplates, one at the superior border and the other at the lateral aspect of the mandibular angle. Postoperatively, patients were evaluated for occlusal stability, infection, pain, trismus, and mediolateral flaring of the fracture segments at the lower border.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group I, with a mean age of 33.90 years (range: 25-45 years), and group II, with a mean age of 28.60 years (range: 20-45 years), did not exhibit any complaints of malocclusion. In group II, infection occurred in two patients (20%), whereas no infections were observed in group I, and this difference was not statistically significant (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> = 2.22, <i>P</i> = 0.13). Neither group showed mediolateral flaring of the lower border, with (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0.00; <i>P</i> = 1.00). Both groups experienced pain and trismus, but the differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The utilization of two miniplates for the treatment of mandibular angle fractures does not confer any discernible advantage over the use of a single plate.</p>","PeriodicalId":101444,"journal":{"name":"National journal of maxillofacial surgery","volume":"16 2","pages":"347-353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12469168/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is a better modality of fixation in mandibular angle fractures, single miniplate or two miniplates? A single-blind comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Gaurav Khemka, Nitin Bhola, Anendd Jadhav, Rajiv Borle, Anuj Jain, Shruti Dalmia\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/njms.njms_10_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mandibular angle fractures constitute a significant proportion (23%-42%) of all mandibular fractures. A persistent controversy surrounds the optimal approach for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures: whether to employ a single miniplate or two miniplates. This study aims to assess the comparative efficacy of employing a single miniplate versus two miniplates for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Twenty male patients diagnosed with mandibular angle fractures were randomly assigned to either group I or group II. Group I received treatment with a single miniplate positioned at the superior border, while group II underwent fixation with two miniplates, one at the superior border and the other at the lateral aspect of the mandibular angle. Postoperatively, patients were evaluated for occlusal stability, infection, pain, trismus, and mediolateral flaring of the fracture segments at the lower border.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group I, with a mean age of 33.90 years (range: 25-45 years), and group II, with a mean age of 28.60 years (range: 20-45 years), did not exhibit any complaints of malocclusion. In group II, infection occurred in two patients (20%), whereas no infections were observed in group I, and this difference was not statistically significant (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> = 2.22, <i>P</i> = 0.13). Neither group showed mediolateral flaring of the lower border, with (<i>X</i> <sup>2</sup> = 0.00; <i>P</i> = 1.00). Both groups experienced pain and trismus, but the differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The utilization of two miniplates for the treatment of mandibular angle fractures does not confer any discernible advantage over the use of a single plate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101444,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"National journal of maxillofacial surgery\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"347-353\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12469168/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"National journal of maxillofacial surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/njms.njms_10_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National journal of maxillofacial surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/njms.njms_10_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:下颌骨角骨折占所有下颌骨骨折的很大比例(23%-42%)。关于下颌骨角骨折的最佳固定方法一直存在争议:是使用单个微型钢板还是两个微型钢板。本研究旨在评估使用单个微型钢板与两个微型钢板固定下颌骨角骨折的比较疗效。材料与方法:将20例诊断为下颌角骨折的男性患者随机分为I组和II组。组1在上缘固定1个微型钢板,组2在上缘固定1个微型钢板,下角外侧固定2个微型钢板。术后,评估患者的咬合稳定性、感染、疼痛、牙关和下边缘骨折段的中外侧扩张。结果:ⅰ组患者平均年龄为33.90岁(范围:25 ~ 45岁),ⅱ组患者平均年龄为28.60岁(范围:20 ~ 45岁),均未出现错颌。II组有2例患者感染(20%),而I组无感染,差异无统计学意义(x2 = 2.22, P = 0.13)。两组均未见下缘中外侧扩阔,差异有统计学意义(x2 = 0.00; P = 1.00)。两组患者均出现疼痛和牙关,但差异无统计学意义。结论:使用两个微型钢板治疗下颌骨角骨折与使用单个钢板相比没有任何明显的优势。
What is a better modality of fixation in mandibular angle fractures, single miniplate or two miniplates? A single-blind comparative study.
Background: Mandibular angle fractures constitute a significant proportion (23%-42%) of all mandibular fractures. A persistent controversy surrounds the optimal approach for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures: whether to employ a single miniplate or two miniplates. This study aims to assess the comparative efficacy of employing a single miniplate versus two miniplates for the fixation of mandibular angle fractures.
Material and methods: Twenty male patients diagnosed with mandibular angle fractures were randomly assigned to either group I or group II. Group I received treatment with a single miniplate positioned at the superior border, while group II underwent fixation with two miniplates, one at the superior border and the other at the lateral aspect of the mandibular angle. Postoperatively, patients were evaluated for occlusal stability, infection, pain, trismus, and mediolateral flaring of the fracture segments at the lower border.
Results: Group I, with a mean age of 33.90 years (range: 25-45 years), and group II, with a mean age of 28.60 years (range: 20-45 years), did not exhibit any complaints of malocclusion. In group II, infection occurred in two patients (20%), whereas no infections were observed in group I, and this difference was not statistically significant (X2 = 2.22, P = 0.13). Neither group showed mediolateral flaring of the lower border, with (X2 = 0.00; P = 1.00). Both groups experienced pain and trismus, but the differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: The utilization of two miniplates for the treatment of mandibular angle fractures does not confer any discernible advantage over the use of a single plate.