-
Annals of Plastic Surgery Feb 2021Le Fort fractures with maxillary immobility are an uncommon presentation of facial trauma often associated with the disturbance of occlusion. Historically, cases...
BACKGROUND
Le Fort fractures with maxillary immobility are an uncommon presentation of facial trauma often associated with the disturbance of occlusion. Historically, cases involving high Le Fort fractures require a coronal extensive approach to mobilize the maxilla for occlusion restoration. Here, we review our institutional series of immobile Le Fort fractures and present their treatment approach, outcomes, classification, and then rationalize our treatment with a concept philosophy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We treated 12 consecutive patients with unilateral and bilateral immobile Le Fort fractures from 2010 to 2017. The mean age was 27.1 years. Ten patients had a unilateral greenstick Le Fort III fracture. Five patients also had associated mandible fractures. Intraoperative occlusions could only be restored after Le Fort I osteotomy was performed on the side of the immobile Le Fort fracture. The mean follow-up period was 1.6 years.
RESULTS
All patients presented good long-term occlusion restoration. There were no cases of nonunion or significant complications. None of the patients complained of any malar or periorbital cosmetic issues during follow-up sessions.
CONCLUSIONS
We presented an institutional series and classification of unusual Le Fort fractures with maxillary immobility, including a previously unreported fracture configuration of greenstick unilateral Le Fort III fractures combined with complete contralateral Le Fort I fracture. Based on our moment concept to rationalize treatment, as well as a systematic review of published literature, we advocate the judicious use of Le Fort I osteotomy to efficiently and safely treat these unusual fractures.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Maxilla; Maxillary Fractures; Osteotomy, Le Fort; Zygoma
PubMed: 33439604
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002651 -
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases Jan 2021Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a rare disease that originates from the uncontrolled proliferation and accumulation of bone marrow-derived immature myeloid... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is a rare disease that originates from the uncontrolled proliferation and accumulation of bone marrow-derived immature myeloid dendritic cells. Dendritic cells are a type of histiocyte that play an important role in the human immune system and are found in the bone, skin, stomach, eyes, intestines, and lungs.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aimed to collect and report published case reports of rare bone disease caused by LCH to avoid misdiagnoses or delays in diagnosis.
METHODS
We systematically searched Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Sciences from August 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019. Studies reporting cases of LCH with rare bone involvement were included.
RESULTS
We identified 60 articles including 64 cases. Of the identified cases, 31 (48.4%) involved children, and 33 (51.6%) involved adults. Additionally, 46.9% (30 individuals) were from Asian countries. The mean age of the children was 7.6 ± 4.3 years and that of the adults was 36 ± 12 years. The findings indicated that unifocal bone involvements were the most prevalent form of the disease (68.7%), and, overall, the skull and chest wall were the most commonly affected bones in both adults and children. The spine and long bones were the second most commonly affected bones in children, and the spine and jaw were the second most commonly affected bones in adults. Pain and swelling were the most frequent presenting signs among the investigated cases, and loss of consciousness, myelopathy, nerve palsy, visual loss, torticollis and clicking sounds were rare signs. Osteolytic lesions were the most frequent radiologic feature (62.5%), and intracranial hemorrhage, fluid-fluid level, dura and intracranial extension and pathologic fractures were rare radiological features. Total excision, curettage and observation in the unifocal group of patients and systemic chemotherapy in the other groups (i.e., multifocal and multisystem) were the most frequent management approaches. The recovery rates of the unifocal and multifocal groups were 77.3% and 81.8%, respectively, while that of the multisystem group was 55.5%. The rates of recurrence and mortality in the multisystem group were 11% and were higher than those in the other groups.
CONCLUSIONS
LCH is a rare disease that can affect any organ in the human body. However, bone is the most commonly involved organ, and rare bone involvements may be the first or only symptom of the disease due to the rarity of such lesions; a lack of familiarity with them may result in misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis.
Topics: Adult; Asia; Bone Diseases; Child; Child, Preschool; Histiocytosis, Langerhans-Cell; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Skull
PubMed: 33388073
DOI: 10.1186/s13023-020-01625-z -
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2020To evaluate the effectiveness of conservative treatment with functional appliances for condylar fractures in pediatric age.
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the effectiveness of conservative treatment with functional appliances for condylar fractures in pediatric age.
METHODS
Four electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, and Web of Science) were consulted with no restriction of publication status or year, up to 31 August 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
based on the PICOS criteria, the selection criteria were set for observational human studies, with at least 10 patients and six months of follow-up. The study population included pediatric patients (aged 5-16 years), with unilateral or bilateral condylar fracture, treated with functional appliances. Condylar remodeling and mandibular growth were analyzed through sequential radiographic examinations.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two independent reviewers carried out title-abstract screening, and a senior investigator was involved to solve any disagreement. The quality of the evidence was assessed through the Canada Institute of Health Economics (IHE) quality appraisal checklist, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool.
RESULTS
A total of 971 articles were retrieved from the electronic search; among them, three studies met the eligibility criteria. A moderate risk of bias was detected in all the studies, due to common limitations (absence of multicenter studies, prospective design, blindness of the investigators, patients' drop-out). At follow-up examinations (between 6 months and 4.9 years), the difference of condylar neck length between the "injured" and "healthy" side was approximately 2 mm, while the anteroposterior condylar width discrepancy was recorded up to 1 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Short- and long-term data revealed that conservative treatment with functional appliances led to partial or full radiological recovery of the joint morphology, along with good to excellent functional results. Patients' age has a crucial role on the treatment choice, and the type of fracture (presence of condylar displacement, or dislocation) is also a major prognostic indicator of the radiologic outcome.
LIMITATION
To confirm the effectiveness of functional appliances, more prospective clinical long-term follow-up studies with homogeneous samples of condylar fractures are deemed necessary. Registration: The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020205650).
Topics: Adolescent; Canada; Child; Child, Preschool; Conservative Treatment; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Orthodontic Appliances, Fixed; Prospective Studies; Radiography, Panoramic; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33317118
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17249204 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2020Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Different bone-modifying agents like bisphosphonates and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL)-inhibitors are used as supportive treatment in men with prostate cancer and bone metastases to prevent skeletal-related events (SREs). SREs such as pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, surgery and radiotherapy to the bone, and hypercalcemia lead to morbidity, a poor performance status, and impaired quality of life. Efficacy and acceptability of the bone-targeted therapy is therefore of high relevance. Until now recommendations in guidelines on which bone-modifying agents should be used are rare and inconsistent.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of bisphosphonates and RANKL-inhibitors as supportive treatment for prostate cancer patients with bone metastases and to generate a clinically meaningful treatment ranking according to their safety and efficacy using network meta-analysis.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified studies by electronically searching the bibliographic databases Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase until 23 March 2020. We searched the Cochrane Library and various trial registries and screened abstracts of conference proceedings and reference lists of identified trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials comparing different bisphosphonates and RANKL-inihibitors with each other or against no further treatment or placebo for men with prostate cancer and bone metastases. We included men with castration-restrictive and castration-sensitive prostate cancer and conducted subgroup analyses according to this criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We defined proportion of participants with pain response and the adverse events renal impairment and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) as the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were SREs in total and each separately (see above), mortality, quality of life, and further adverse events such as grade 3 to 4 adverse events, hypocalcemia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. We conducted network meta-analysis and generated treatment rankings for all outcomes, except quality of life due to insufficient reporting on this outcome. We compiled ranking plots to compare single outcomes of efficacy against outcomes of acceptability of the bone-modifying agents. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-five trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Twenty-one trials could be considered in the quantitative analysis, of which six bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid, risedronate, pamidronate, alendronate, etidronate, or clodronate) were compared with each other, the RANKL-inhibitor denosumab, or no treatment/placebo. By conducting network meta-analysis we were able to compare all of these reported agents directly and/or indirectly within the network for each outcome. In the abstract only the comparisons of zoledronic acid and denosumab against the main comparator (no treatment/placebo) are described for outcomes that were predefined as most relevant and that also appear in the 'Summary of findings' table. Other results, as well as results of subgroup analyses regarding castration status of participants, are displayed in the Results section of the full text. Treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases the proportion of participants with pain response when compared to no treatment/placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 2.32; per 1000 participants 121 more (19 less to 349 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 1013 participants). For this outcome none of the trials reported results for the comparison with denosumab. The adverse event renal impairment probably occurs more often when treated with zoledronic acid compared to treatment/placebo (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.45; per 1000 participants 78 more (10 more to 180 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 6 trials including 1769 participants). Results for denosumab could not be included for this outcome, since zero events cannot be considered in the network meta-analysis, therefore it does not appear in the ranking. Treatment with denosumab results in increased occurrence of the adverse event ONJ (RR 3.45, 95% CI 1.06 to 11.24; per 1000 participants 30 more (1 more to 125 more); high-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 3006 participants) compared to no treatment/placebo. When comparing zoledronic acid to no treatment/placebo, the confidence intervals include the possibility of benefit or harm, therefore treatment with zoledronic acid probably neither reduces nor increases ONJ (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 4.87; per 1000 participants 11 more (3 less to 47 more); moderate-certainty evidence; network based on 4 trials including 3006 participants). Compared to no treatment/placebo, treatment with zoledronic acid (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97) and denosumab (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) may result in a reduction of the total number of SREs (per 1000 participants 75 fewer (131 fewer to 14 fewer) and 131 fewer (215 fewer to 19 fewer); both low-certainty evidence; 12 trials, 5240 participants). Treatment with zoledronic acid and denosumab likely neither reduces nor increases mortality when compared to no treatment/placebo (zoledronic acid RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; per 1000 participants 48 fewer (97 fewer to 5 more); denosumab RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.11; per 1000 participants 34 fewer (111 fewer to 54 more); both moderate-certainty evidence; 13 trials, 5494 participants). Due to insufficient reporting, no network meta-analysis was possible for the outcome quality of life. One study with 1904 participants comparing zoledronic acid and denosumab showed that more zoledronic acid-treated participants than denosumab-treated participants experienced a greater than or equal to five-point decrease in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General total scores over a range of 18 months (average relative difference = 6.8%, range -9.4% to 14.6%) or worsening of cancer-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
When considering bone-modifying agents as supportive treatment, one has to balance between efficacy and acceptability. Results suggest that Zoledronic acid likely increases both the proportion of participants with pain response, and the proportion of participants experiencing adverse events However, more trials with head-to-head comparisons including all potential agents are needed to draw the whole picture and proof the results of this analysis.
Topics: Adult; Alendronate; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; Bisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Neoplasms; Clodronic Acid; Denosumab; Diphosphonates; Etidronic Acid; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Pamidronate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Quality of Life; RANK Ligand; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risedronic Acid; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 33270906
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013020.pub2 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2021This systematic review aimed to compare the Erich arch bars (EABs) with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) screws in maxillofacial fractures involving dental occlusion on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review aimed to compare the Erich arch bars (EABs) with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) screws in maxillofacial fractures involving dental occlusion on perioperative parameters. Four electronic databases were searched: MedLine (Pubmed), Web of Science, VHL, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria comprised clinical trials comparing the two IMF methods, assessing at least one of the outcomes: occlusal stability, oral hygiene, quality of life, time to apply and remove IMF appliances, and complications. Risk of bias was evaluated through the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Fifteen papers were included in the qualitative analysis and 12 of those in the meta-analysis. Times for EABs application (mean difference (MD) 46.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 30.63-63.02) and removal (MD 22.89; 95% CI 14.61-31.17) were longer compared with IMF screws. There is higher risk of glove perforation (risk ratio (RR) 3.81; 95% CI 2.41-6.04) and lower risk of iatrogenic injuries (RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.09-0.48) when placing EABs compared with IMF screws. No significant differences in plaque index were found (MD 1.07; 95% CI -0.17 to 2.31). The quality of this evidence ranged from very low to low and was mainly compromised by risk of bias assessment. Further studies are necessary to evaluate transurgical IMF stability and postoperative occlusal quality and quality of life when comparing EABs with IMF screws.
Topics: Bone Screws; Dental Occlusion; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Jaw Fixation Techniques; Mandibular Fractures; Quality of Life
PubMed: 32798159
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2020.07.022 -
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial... Oct 2020The aim of the present systematic review was to determine whether closed treatment (CLT) with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) is superior or equivalent to open reduction... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Will Closed Treatment Provide Better Mandibular Motion Than Open Reduction and Internal Fixation in Cases of Unilateral Displaced Subcondylar Fracture? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
PURPOSE
The aim of the present systematic review was to determine whether closed treatment (CLT) with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) is superior or equivalent to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in the management of unilateral displaced subcondylar fractures regarding the range of mandibular motion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To address our question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the reported data after a comprehensive manual and electronic database search of studies reported up to 2017 in the English language that had compared CLT and ORIF of mandibular condyle fractures in adults. The following outcomes were recorded: maximum interincisal opening (MIO), protrusive movement (PM), lateral excursion toward the fractured side (LEFS), and lateral excursion toward the nonfractured side (LENFS).
RESULTS
The search resulted in 8 studies, 4 of which were included in the meta-analysis. The MIO and PM showed no statistically significant differences, with an effect size of -0.823 (P = .112) and -0.633 (P = .079), respectively. However, the LEFS and LENFS were superior after CLT, with an effect size of -0.710 (P = .031) and -0.682 (P = .017), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from the present review suggest that both ORIF and CLT can provide comparable MIO and PM in subjects with unilateral displaced subcondylar fractures. However, CLT was superior to ORIF for both LEFS and LENFS.
Topics: Adult; Fracture Fixation; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Mandible; Mandibular Condyle; Mandibular Fractures; Open Fracture Reduction; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32554064
DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2020.05.020 -
BMC Geriatrics Jun 2020Prescribing trends suggest that pharmacologic alternatives to antipsychotics are gaining in popularity, but randomized trial (RCT) data of their comparative safety is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Prescribing trends suggest that pharmacologic alternatives to antipsychotics are gaining in popularity, but randomized trial (RCT) data of their comparative safety is scarce. Our objective was to describe the comparative safety of pharmacologic interventions for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, from inception to May 28, 2019, for studies of pharmacologic interventions used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. Dementia care partners selected fracture risk as our primary outcome. Pairs of reviewers, working independently, conducted all study screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal. We conducted Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses (NMAs) using data from RCTs to derive odds ratios (ORs). In secondary analyses, we conducted frequentist random-effects NMAs using data from RCTs and Bayesian three-level hierarchical random-effects NMAs incorporating data from RCTs and non-randomized studies.
RESULTS
Our systematic review included 209 randomized and non-randomized studies (889,378 persons with dementia). In NMAs of data from randomized trials, there were no increased odds of fracture associated with any intervention in primary analyses; however, data were sparse. We found increased odds of cerebrovascular events associated with antipsychotics (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% credible interval [CrI] 1.29 to 3.62; number needed to harm [NNH] = 99) and increased odds of falls associated with dextromethorphan-quinidine (OR 4.16, 95% CrI 1.47 to 14.22; NNH = 55) compared to placebo in persons with dementia. In a subgroup of persons with Alzheimer disease, antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of fracture compared to anticonvulsants (OR 54.1, 95% CrI 1.15 to 38,300; NNH = 18). In older persons (mean age ≥ 80 years) with dementia, anticonvulsants were associated with increased odds of death compared to placebo (OR 8.36, 95% CrI 1.17 to 203.4; NNH = 35) and antipsychotics were associated with increased odds of death compared to antidepressants (OR 5.28, 95% CrI 1.06 to 3.51; NNH = 47).
CONCLUSION
Although antipsychotics were associated with greater harm than antidepressants and anticonvulsants in subgroups of persons with dementia, medications used in lieu of antipsychotics for treating neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia, such as anticonvulsants and dextromethorphan-quinidine, were also associated with harm. Decision-making concerning treatments prescribed in lieu of antipsychotics should include potential harms.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42017050130.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Bayes Theorem; Dementia; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 32546202
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-020-01607-7 -
Long-term impact of bone-modifying agents for the treatment of bone metastases: a systematic review.Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Feb 2021Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for bone metastases are commonly prescribed for many years even though randomized clinical trials are only 1-2 years in duration. A...
PURPOSE
Bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for bone metastases are commonly prescribed for many years even though randomized clinical trials are only 1-2 years in duration. A systematic review on the risk-benefit of BMA use for > 2 years in breast cancer or castrate-resistant prostate cancer was conducted.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (1970-February 2019) for randomized and observational studies, and case series reporting on BMA efficacy (skeletal-related events and quality of life) and toxicity (osteonecrosis of the jaw, renal impairment, hypocalcemia, and atypical femoral fractures) beyond 2 years.
RESULTS
Of 2107 citations, 64 studies were identified. Three prospective and 9 retrospective studies were eligible. Data beyond 2 years was limited to subgroup analyses in all studies. Only one study (n = 181) reported skeletal-related event rates based on bisphosphonate exposure, with decreased rates from 27.6% (0-24 months) to 15.5% (> 24 months). None reported on quality of life. All 12 studies (denosumab (n = 948), zoledronate (n = 1036), pamidronate (n = 163), pamidronate-zoledronate (n = 522), ibandronate (n = 118)) reported ≥ 1 toxicity outcome. Seven bisphosphonate studies (n = 1077) and one denosumab study (n = 948) reported on osteonecrosis of the jaw. Across three studies (n = 1236), osteonecrosis of the jaw incidence ranged from 1 to 4% in the first 2 years to 3.8-18% after 2 years. Clinically significant hypocalcemia ranged from 1 to 2%. Severe renal function decline was ≤ 3%. Atypical femoral fractures were rare.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence informing the use of BMA beyond 2 years is heterogeneous and based on retrospective analysis. Prospective randomized studies with greater emphasis on quality of life are needed.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42019126813.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Neoplasms; Breast Neoplasms; Diphosphonates; Female; Humans; Male; Observational Studies as Topic; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32535678
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05556-0 -
The British Journal of Oral &... Jul 2020The choice of surgical or non-surgical treatment of mandibular condylar fractures remains controversial. Earlier trials documented multiple complications of surgical... (Review)
Review
The choice of surgical or non-surgical treatment of mandibular condylar fractures remains controversial. Earlier trials documented multiple complications of surgical treatment and recommended a non-surgical approach, while more recent trials have shown superior outcomes of surgical compared with non-surgical treatment in some cases. In this paper we systematically review the systematic reviews on the topic that were published before January 2019 and which followed the PRISMA statement, and propose an algorithm for the management of these fractures. Two systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria of the current review, both of which showed better outcome from surgical than non-surgical treatment. We propose an algorithm based on the feasibility of fixation, ability to restore joint and occlusal function, and ensure adequate healing, and consider patient-associated factors that facilitate decision-making.
Topics: Humans; Algorithms; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Mandibular Condyle; Mandibular Fractures; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Wound Healing
PubMed: 32245577
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.03.014 -
Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral... Apr 2020The aim of this study was to evaluate the mandibular and articular dynamics and the presence of complications associated with surgical or nonsurgical treatments of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Changes in mandibular and articular dynamics associated with surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of mandibular condylar fractures: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the mandibular and articular dynamics and the presence of complications associated with surgical or nonsurgical treatments of condylar fractures.
STUDY DESIGN
Clinical trials that compared open reduction internal fixation and maxillomandibular fixation in patients with condylar fractures were included. We performed an electronic search of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences) databases starting from February 2017 and updated in January 2019 and found 467 articles. We evaluated methodologic quality by using the criteria from Cochrane's Collaboration Tool.
RESULTS
After independent screening of abstracts, we assessed the full texts of 88 articles; 9 studies were included for qualitative synthesis; but only 8 were included for the meta-analysis. Four studies were considered to have high risk of bias, and 5 were considered to have low risk. The risk ratio (RR = 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.32) was observed for complications. The quality of evidence, using GRADE software, was considered low for maximum mouth opening and protrusive movement and moderate for lateral excursion movement and complications.
CONCLUSIONS
This review suggested that open reduction internal fixation and maxillomandibular fixation are effective. However, surgical treatment presented higher objective parameters. Nonsurgical treatment presented a high index of complications, such as malocclusion, pain and deviation.
Topics: Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Jaw Fixation Techniques; Mandibular Condyle; Mandibular Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32102762
DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2019.10.010