Comparative evaluation of bite force in patients treated for unilateral mandibular condylar fractures by open and closed methods

Abstract

Background/Aim Condylar fractures account for a large proportion (20% to 52%) of mandibular injuries. The goal of treating these fractures is to restore the occlusion, thereby re‐establishing the masticatory function as close as possible to the patient's pre‐trauma state. The aim of this study was to compare the bite forces following unilateral condylar fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with those managed by the closed method. Method Patients with unilateral mandibular condylar fractures were divided into two groups (n = 20) using a simple randomization method. Patients in group I were treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using titanium miniplates and screws. Patients in group II were treated by the closed method with inter‐maxillary fixation. Patients in both groups were evaluated pre‐operatively and then post‐operatively at one week, one month and three months for maximum bite force achieved at the central incisor, premolar and molar regions. Results Pre‐operative bite forces on the unaffected site were significantly higher than the affected site in both groups, whereas no significant difference was observed in bite forces between the unaffected and affected sites in both groups post‐operatively. The bite forces achieved at both the unaffected and affected sites in the ORIF group were significantly higher than in the closed group. Conclusion Maximum bite forces differed significantly when the treatment was done with the open method, and the patients treated with the open method needed less time to achieve the maximum bite forces, thereby making an earlier return to function.

Mouthguard design, pediatric trauma, and reporting guidelines

“…Among management options are open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and physical therapy with a soft diet or maxillomandibular fixation (MMF). [28][29][30][31] In this Issue, Sobrero et al…”

“…However, the treatment of these injuries remains controversial. Among management options are open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and physical therapy with a soft diet or maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) 28–31 . In this Issue , Sobrero et al conducted a retrospective study to analyze the surgical treatment and long‐term outcomes of dentate mandibular fractures in children and adolescents 32 .…”

Predictive factors for maxillofacial fractures, sedentary behavior, and dental trauma literacy

“…Mandibular fractures may occur due to various reasons and may have significant consequences. 10,15,16 In the previous century, local and regional surveys of mandibular fracture patterns have been used to understand oral trauma. The recent development of national databases cataloging trauma, such as the National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) created in 1989, has facilitated the examination of trauma demographics at a national scale.…”

“…Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is one way to do so. 15,23 Maxillo-mandibular fixation (MMF) is the current gold standard and can be conducted via a manual or rigid technique. 24 There are advantages and disadvantages to either technique that must be considered when selecting the treatment plan in trauma cases.…”

“…Mandibular fractures may occur due to various reasons and may have significant consequences 10,15,16 . In the previous century, local and regional surveys of mandibular fracture patterns have been used to understand oral trauma.…”