Cargando…

Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases

Clinical limitations following closed reduction of an intracapsular condylar fracture include a decrease in maximum mouth opening, reduced range of mandibular movements such as protrusion/lateral excursion, and reduced occlusal stability. Anteromedial and inferior displacement of the medial condyle...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jeong, Yeong Kon, Park, Won-Jong, Park, Il Kyung, Kim, Gi Tae, Choi, Eun Joo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5685863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29142868
http://dx.doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2017.43.5.331
_version_ 1783278693335957504
author Jeong, Yeong Kon
Park, Won-Jong
Park, Il Kyung
Kim, Gi Tae
Choi, Eun Joo
author_facet Jeong, Yeong Kon
Park, Won-Jong
Park, Il Kyung
Kim, Gi Tae
Choi, Eun Joo
author_sort Jeong, Yeong Kon
collection PubMed
description Clinical limitations following closed reduction of an intracapsular condylar fracture include a decrease in maximum mouth opening, reduced range of mandibular movements such as protrusion/lateral excursion, and reduced occlusal stability. Anteromedial and inferior displacement of the medial condyle fragment by traction of the lateral pterygoid muscle can induce bone overgrowth due to distraction osteogenesis between the medial and lateral condylar fragments, causing structural changes in the condyle. In addition, when conventional maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) is performed, persistent interdental contact sustains masticatory muscle hyperactivity, leading to a decreased vertical dimension and premature contact of the posterior teeth. To resolve the functional problems of conventional closed reduction, we designed a novel method for closed reduction through protrusive MMF for two weeks. Two patients diagnosed with intracapsular condylar fracture had favorable occlusion after protrusive MMF without premature contact of the posterior teeth. This particular method has two main advantages. First, in the protrusive position, the lateral condylar fragment is moved in the anterior-inferior direction closer to the medial fragment, minimizing bone formation between the two fragments and preventing structural changes. Second, in the protrusive position, posterior disclusion occurs, preventing masticatory muscle hyperactivity and the subsequent gradual decrease in ramus height.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5685863
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56858632017-11-15 Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases Jeong, Yeong Kon Park, Won-Jong Park, Il Kyung Kim, Gi Tae Choi, Eun Joo J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg Case Report Clinical limitations following closed reduction of an intracapsular condylar fracture include a decrease in maximum mouth opening, reduced range of mandibular movements such as protrusion/lateral excursion, and reduced occlusal stability. Anteromedial and inferior displacement of the medial condyle fragment by traction of the lateral pterygoid muscle can induce bone overgrowth due to distraction osteogenesis between the medial and lateral condylar fragments, causing structural changes in the condyle. In addition, when conventional maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) is performed, persistent interdental contact sustains masticatory muscle hyperactivity, leading to a decreased vertical dimension and premature contact of the posterior teeth. To resolve the functional problems of conventional closed reduction, we designed a novel method for closed reduction through protrusive MMF for two weeks. Two patients diagnosed with intracapsular condylar fracture had favorable occlusion after protrusive MMF without premature contact of the posterior teeth. This particular method has two main advantages. First, in the protrusive position, the lateral condylar fragment is moved in the anterior-inferior direction closer to the medial fragment, minimizing bone formation between the two fragments and preventing structural changes. Second, in the protrusive position, posterior disclusion occurs, preventing masticatory muscle hyperactivity and the subsequent gradual decrease in ramus height. The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2017-10 2017-10-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5685863/ /pubmed/29142868 http://dx.doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2017.43.5.331 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Case Report
Jeong, Yeong Kon
Park, Won-Jong
Park, Il Kyung
Kim, Gi Tae
Choi, Eun Joo
Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title_full Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title_fullStr Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title_full_unstemmed Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title_short Protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
title_sort protrusive maxillomandibular fixation for intracapsular condylar fracture: a report of two cases
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5685863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29142868
http://dx.doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2017.43.5.331
work_keys_str_mv AT jeongyeongkon protrusivemaxillomandibularfixationforintracapsularcondylarfractureareportoftwocases
AT parkwonjong protrusivemaxillomandibularfixationforintracapsularcondylarfractureareportoftwocases
AT parkilkyung protrusivemaxillomandibularfixationforintracapsularcondylarfractureareportoftwocases
AT kimgitae protrusivemaxillomandibularfixationforintracapsularcondylarfractureareportoftwocases
AT choieunjoo protrusivemaxillomandibularfixationforintracapsularcondylarfractureareportoftwocases