Cargando…

A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures

Background: In the past few decades, there has been an increasing interest in obtaining a more instantaneous return to normal function using diverse methods of direct fixation. Aims and Objectives: To compare the conventional 2-mm 2D (two-dimensional) miniplates and 2-mm 3D (three-dimensional) minip...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sarepally, Godvine, Seethamsetty, Swetcha, Karpe, Tanveer, Nasyam, Fazil A, Fatima, Umayra, Fatema, Raia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35186584
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21325
_version_ 1784652464958472192
author Sarepally, Godvine
Seethamsetty, Swetcha
Karpe, Tanveer
Nasyam, Fazil A
Fatima, Umayra
Fatema, Raia
author_facet Sarepally, Godvine
Seethamsetty, Swetcha
Karpe, Tanveer
Nasyam, Fazil A
Fatima, Umayra
Fatema, Raia
author_sort Sarepally, Godvine
collection PubMed
description Background: In the past few decades, there has been an increasing interest in obtaining a more instantaneous return to normal function using diverse methods of direct fixation. Aims and Objectives: To compare the conventional 2-mm 2D (two-dimensional) miniplates and 2-mm 3D (three-dimensional) miniplates in terms of treatment outcome, stability, duration of surgery, and complications of treatment of symphysis and parasymphysis mandibular fractures. Materials and Methods: 16 patients with clinical and radiological evidence of fractures of the mandible in symphysis and parasymphysis areas treated by open reduction and internal fixation with 2D miniplates and 3D miniplates. The patients were followed up for three months and assessed clinically and radiographically by taking orthopantomograms. The assessment was made on the immediate postoperative day, third day, fifth day, the seventh day, two weeks, three weeks, four weeks, two months, and three months. Results: Mean intraoperative time taken for 2D miniplate was 54.8 min and for 3D miniplate was 40.6 min. Mild paraesthesia at the soft tissue region supplied by mental nerve was noticed in two patients (25%) of group I, whereas there was no such paraesthesia observed in group II patients. Wound dehiscence and infection were noticed in one patient in group I. Conclusion: 3D plates seem to be better than conventional 2-mm miniplates for symphysis and parasymphysis fractures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8849431
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88494312022-02-18 A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures Sarepally, Godvine Seethamsetty, Swetcha Karpe, Tanveer Nasyam, Fazil A Fatima, Umayra Fatema, Raia Cureus Plastic Surgery Background: In the past few decades, there has been an increasing interest in obtaining a more instantaneous return to normal function using diverse methods of direct fixation. Aims and Objectives: To compare the conventional 2-mm 2D (two-dimensional) miniplates and 2-mm 3D (three-dimensional) miniplates in terms of treatment outcome, stability, duration of surgery, and complications of treatment of symphysis and parasymphysis mandibular fractures. Materials and Methods: 16 patients with clinical and radiological evidence of fractures of the mandible in symphysis and parasymphysis areas treated by open reduction and internal fixation with 2D miniplates and 3D miniplates. The patients were followed up for three months and assessed clinically and radiographically by taking orthopantomograms. The assessment was made on the immediate postoperative day, third day, fifth day, the seventh day, two weeks, three weeks, four weeks, two months, and three months. Results: Mean intraoperative time taken for 2D miniplate was 54.8 min and for 3D miniplate was 40.6 min. Mild paraesthesia at the soft tissue region supplied by mental nerve was noticed in two patients (25%) of group I, whereas there was no such paraesthesia observed in group II patients. Wound dehiscence and infection were noticed in one patient in group I. Conclusion: 3D plates seem to be better than conventional 2-mm miniplates for symphysis and parasymphysis fractures. Cureus 2022-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8849431/ /pubmed/35186584 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21325 Text en Copyright © 2022, Sarepally et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/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 author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Plastic Surgery
Sarepally, Godvine
Seethamsetty, Swetcha
Karpe, Tanveer
Nasyam, Fazil A
Fatima, Umayra
Fatema, Raia
A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title_full A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title_fullStr A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title_short A Comparative Evaluation of 2.0mm Two-Dimensional Miniplates Versus 2.0mm Three-Dimensional Miniplates in Mandibular Fractures
title_sort comparative evaluation of 2.0mm two-dimensional miniplates versus 2.0mm three-dimensional miniplates in mandibular fractures
topic Plastic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849431/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35186584
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21325
work_keys_str_mv AT sarepallygodvine acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT seethamsettyswetcha acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT karpetanveer acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT nasyamfazila acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT fatimaumayra acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT fatemaraia acomparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT sarepallygodvine comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT seethamsettyswetcha comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT karpetanveer comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT nasyamfazila comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT fatimaumayra comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures
AT fatemaraia comparativeevaluationof20mmtwodimensionalminiplatesversus20mmthreedimensionalminiplatesinmandibularfractures