Cargando…

Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment of mandibular fractures treated in two European centre in 10 years. Study Design: This study is based on 2 systematic computer-assisted databases that have continuously recorded patients hospitalized with maxillofacial fractures in two...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boffano, Paolo, Kommers, Sofie C., Roccia, Fabio, Forouzanfar, Tymour
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4393986/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25475782
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20263
_version_ 1782366242574696448
author Boffano, Paolo
Kommers, Sofie C.
Roccia, Fabio
Forouzanfar, Tymour
author_facet Boffano, Paolo
Kommers, Sofie C.
Roccia, Fabio
Forouzanfar, Tymour
author_sort Boffano, Paolo
collection PubMed
description Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment of mandibular fractures treated in two European centre in 10 years. Study Design: This study is based on 2 systematic computer-assisted databases that have continuously recorded patients hospitalized with maxillofacial fractures in two centers in Turin, Italy and in Amsterdam, the Netherlands for ten years. Only patients who were admitted for mandibular fractures were considered for this study. Results: Between 2001 and 2010, a total of 752 patients were admitted at Turin hospital with a total of 1167 mandibular fractures not associated with further maxillofacial fractures, whereas 245 patients were admitted at Amsterdam hospital with a total of 434 mandibular fractures. At Amsterdam center, a total of 457 plates (1.5 - 2.7 mm) were used for the 434 mandibular fracture lines, whereas at Turin center 1232 plates (1.5 – 2.5 mm) were used for the management of the 1167 mandibular fracture lines. At Turin center, 190 patients were treated primarily with IMF, whereas 35 patients were treated with such treatment option at Amsterdam center. Conclusions: Current protocols for the management of mandibular fractures are quite efficient. It is difficult to obtain a uniform protocol, because of the difference of course of each occurring fracture and because of surgeons’ experiences and preferences. Several techniques can still be used for each peculiar fracture of the mandible. Key words:Mandibular fracture, facial trauma, maxillofacial, treatment, multicentre, database.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4393986
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43939862015-04-13 Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols Boffano, Paolo Kommers, Sofie C. Roccia, Fabio Forouzanfar, Tymour Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Research Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the treatment of mandibular fractures treated in two European centre in 10 years. Study Design: This study is based on 2 systematic computer-assisted databases that have continuously recorded patients hospitalized with maxillofacial fractures in two centers in Turin, Italy and in Amsterdam, the Netherlands for ten years. Only patients who were admitted for mandibular fractures were considered for this study. Results: Between 2001 and 2010, a total of 752 patients were admitted at Turin hospital with a total of 1167 mandibular fractures not associated with further maxillofacial fractures, whereas 245 patients were admitted at Amsterdam hospital with a total of 434 mandibular fractures. At Amsterdam center, a total of 457 plates (1.5 - 2.7 mm) were used for the 434 mandibular fracture lines, whereas at Turin center 1232 plates (1.5 – 2.5 mm) were used for the management of the 1167 mandibular fracture lines. At Turin center, 190 patients were treated primarily with IMF, whereas 35 patients were treated with such treatment option at Amsterdam center. Conclusions: Current protocols for the management of mandibular fractures are quite efficient. It is difficult to obtain a uniform protocol, because of the difference of course of each occurring fracture and because of surgeons’ experiences and preferences. Several techniques can still be used for each peculiar fracture of the mandible. Key words:Mandibular fracture, facial trauma, maxillofacial, treatment, multicentre, database. Medicina Oral S.L. 2015-03 2014-12-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4393986/ /pubmed/25475782 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20263 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Boffano, Paolo
Kommers, Sofie C.
Roccia, Fabio
Forouzanfar, Tymour
Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title_full Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title_fullStr Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title_full_unstemmed Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title_short Mandibular trauma treatment: A comparison of two protocols
title_sort mandibular trauma treatment: a comparison of two protocols
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4393986/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25475782
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20263
work_keys_str_mv AT boffanopaolo mandibulartraumatreatmentacomparisonoftwoprotocols
AT kommerssofiec mandibulartraumatreatmentacomparisonoftwoprotocols
AT rocciafabio mandibulartraumatreatmentacomparisonoftwoprotocols
AT forouzanfartymour mandibulartraumatreatmentacomparisonoftwoprotocols