| Title: | Manual versus rigid intraoperative maxillo-mandibularfixation in the surgical management of mandibular fractures : a European prospective analysis |
|---|
| Authors: | ID Sobrero, Federica (Author)
ID Roccia, Fabio (Author)
ID Vilaplana, Valentines (Author)
ID Mari Roig, Antonio (Author)
ID Raveggi, Elisa (Author)
ID Birk, Anže (Author)
ID Vesnaver, Aleš (Author), et al. |
|---|
| Files: |  PDF - Presentation file, download (617,14 KB)
MD5: 2A96CADF3FEC7B588712F52E3CB64F61
 URL - Source URL, visit https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/edt.12851
|
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| Typology: | 1.01 - Original Scientific Article |
|---|
| Organization: |  UKC LJ - Ljubljana University Medical Centre
|
|---|
| Abstract: | Purpose: Intraoperative stabilisation of bony fragments with maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) is an essential step in the surgical treatment of mandibular fractures that are treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). The MMF can be performed with or without wire-based methods, rigid or manual MMF, respectively. The aim of this study was to compare the use of manual versus rigid MMF, in terms of occlusal outcomes and infective complications. Materials and methods: This multi-centric prospective study involved 12 European maxillofacial centres and included adult patients (age ≥16 years) with mandibular fractures treated with ORIF. The following data were collected: age, gender, pre-trauma dental status (dentate or partially dentate), cause of injury, fracture site, associated facial fractures, surgical approach, modality of intraoperative MMF (manual or rigid), outcome (minor/major malocclusions and infective complications) and revision surgeries. The main outcome was malocclusion at 6 weeks after surgery. Results: Between May 1, 2021 and April 30, 2022, 319 patients-257 males and 62 females (median age, 28 years)-with mandibular fractures (185 single, 116 double and 18 triple fractures) were hospitalised and treated with ORIF. Intraoperative MMF was performed manually on 112 (35%) patients and with rigid MMF on 207 (65%) patients. The study variables did not differ significantly between the two groups, except for age. Minor occlusion disturbances were observed in 4 (3.6%) patients in the manual MMF group and in 10 (4.8%) patients in the rigid MMF group (p > .05). In the rigid MMF group, only one case of major malocclusion required a revision surgery. Infective complications involved 3.6% and 5.8% of patients in the manual and rigid MMF group, respectively (p > .05). Conclusion: Intraoperative MMF was performed manually in nearly one third of the patients, with wide variability among the centres and no difference observed in terms of number, site and displacement of fractures. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative malocclusion among patients treated with manual or rigid MMF. This suggests that both techniques were equally effective in providing intraoperative MMF. |
|---|
| Keywords: | maxillo-mandibularfixation, mandibular fracture, surgical management, internal fixation device, jaw fixation techniques, multi-centric study, open fracture reduction, prospective study |
|---|
| Publication status: | Published |
|---|
| Publication version: | Version of Record |
|---|
| Year of publishing: | 2023 |
|---|
| Number of pages: | str. 448-454 |
|---|
| Numbering: | Vol. 39, issue 5 |
|---|
| PID: | 20.500.12556/DiRROS-25132  |
|---|
| UDC: | 616.31 |
|---|
| ISSN on article: | 1600-9657 |
|---|
| DOI: | 10.1111/edt.12851 |
|---|
| COBISS.SI-ID: | 262100995 |
|---|
| Note: | Nasl. z nasl. zaslona;
Opis vira z dne 18. 12. 2025;
|
|---|
| Publication date in DiRROS: | 12.01.2026 |
|---|
| Views: | 165 |
|---|
| Downloads: | 62 |
|---|
| Metadata: |    |
|---|
|
:
|
Copy citation |
|---|
| | | | Share: |  |
|---|
Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click
on the title to get all document metadata. |
