No abstract

No abstract

Purpose: Maxillofacial trauma represents a serious public health problem and their epidemiology is extremely variable. The objective of the present study was to analyze and discuss the epidemiological characteristics of 2492 patients with oral and maxillofacial trauma over a 5-year period. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at different hospitals of Xinjiang from 2012 to 2016. Data were collected for the cause of injury, age and gender distribution, frequency and type of injury, localization and frequency of soft tissue injuries, dentoalveolar trauma, facial bone fractures, presence of associated injuries, nerve injury, different treatment protocols. All the data were analyzed using statistical analysis that is chi squared test. Statistical analyses performed included descriptive analysis, chi square test, and logistic regression analyses. Results: A total of 2492 maxillofacial trauma patients were seen in 1981 patients with a male to female ratio of 3.88:1. The age group 21 to 30 years accounted for the largest subgroup in both sexes. The most common etiology of the trauma was traffic accident, accounted for 41.8%. The mandible (31.97%) was the most common site of fracture followed by the zygoma (25.3%). The common type associated injuries was limb injury (27.5%), it was followed by brain (24.5%) and eye (21.4%) injuries. The common nerve injury was the facial nerve injury, accounting for 62.9%. Conclusion: The incidence of oral and maxillofacial trauma is related to gender, age, and the cause of trauma. Young adults are the most likely group (P < 0.05). Maxillofacial trauma is often associated with limb, craniocerebral, and eye injuries. Traffic accident is the main cause of maxillofacial injury (P < 0.5).

Background/purpose The aims of the present study were to 1) evaluate the clinical outcomes between different fixation methods in the management of mandibular fractures (MFs) and 2) determine which fixation method is the best option for the treatment of mandibular fractures. Materials and methods A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, examining Medline-Ovid, Embase, and Pubmed databases. Inclusion criteria were studied in humans, including randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, and retrospective studies, with the aim of comparing the two techniques. In addition, the incidence of complications was evaluated. Results Thirty-two publications were included: 20 randomized controlled trials, 4 controlled clinical trials, and 8 retrospective studies. There were statistically significant advantages for 3-dimensional miniplate and lag screws. There was no statistically significant difference between locking plates and standard miniplates (P = 0 0.2). The cumulative odds ratio was 0.64, meaning that the use of locking miniplate in the fixation of MFs decreases the risk for postoperative complications by 36% over the use of standard miniplates. Conclusion The results of the three-Dimensional Versus Standard miniplate showed that 3-dimensional miniplate is the best option for mandibular fractures. Regarding Lag Screws Versus Miniplates results of the meta-analysis found that the use of lag screws is superior to using miniplates in reducing the incidence of postoperative complications. And in regards to locking miniplates versus non-locking miniplate, the analysis indicates that the 2.0-mm locking miniplate is a prospective fixation system in the treatment of maxillofacial fractures.