Traumatic injuries: imaging of facial injuries

Salvolini, U.

doi:10.1007/s00330-002-1445-8

Cited by 54 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, isolated fractures of the maxillary sinus are not common and generally consist of depressed fractures of the anterior wall of the maxillary sinus. 5,6 The most common facial fractures are nasal fracture which accounts for approximately 50% of isolated fractures. 5,8 The severity of the nasal fracture depends on the direction and amount of impact of trauma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 The indications for surgery to the patients of nasal trauma are septal fracture, septal dislocation, alteration of nasal bridge or severe soft tissue injury, whereas other fractures are managed conservatively. 6,8,11 The frequency of naso-ethmoidal fractures is around 7%. Direct blow to the lateral mid face results in zygomatic-malar complex fracture.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It helps in detecting the exact site, number and extent of fractures, displacement of fragments and soft tissue injuries. 5,6,8 The added advantage of MDCT is 3-D reconstruction and multiplanar reformation in coronal and sagittal planes which are extremely helpful in assessing the bony architecture in large comminuted, displaced and complex fractures involving multiple planes 9 that helps the surgeons for appropriate planning and management. Role of MRI in maxillofacial trauma is to assess the soft tissue injuries, it has excellent soft tissue contrast; and also aids in assessing the patients with neurological deficits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multidetector computed tomographic evaluation of maxillofacial trauma

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Maxillofacial injuries are one of the most frequently encountered entities accounting for a large proportion of patients in emergency department. Present study was performed to assess the role of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in patients of maxillofacial trauma and to describe the spectrum of various patterns of injuries in maxillofacial region in this part of Nepal. Methods: The study was carried out on a prospective basis over a period of one year. All the patients referred for evaluation of maxillofacial trauma were included in the study. MDCT was done in patients of maxillofacial injury and the data was recorded and analyzed. Volumetric MDCT scan of the maxillofacial region was performed in axial plane with multiplanar reconstruction in coronal and sagittal planes were obtained wherever required. Results: Out of 60 patients of maxillofacial trauma 42 (70%) were males and 18 (30%) were females and age ranges from 12 to 70 years. The 11?30 years age group has the highest percentage (55%) of maxillofacial trauma, followed by 31?40 (20%). The common cause of injuries in our study was road traffic accidents (58.33%), fall from height (20%), physical assault (16.66%) and sport injuries (5%). Out of 60 patients there was total of 115 fractures. The frequency and types of fracture was as follows: orbital floor fracture in 21 (35%), maxillary sinus wall fracture in 18 (30%), nasal bone fracture in 17 (28.33%), jaw fracture in 15 (25%), zygomatic bone fracture in 13 (21.66%), orbital wall fracture in 11 (18.33%), naso?ethmoidal fractures in 9 (15%), frontal sinus fracture in 7 (11.66%), Lefort fracture in 1 (1.66%) and others 3 (5%). The highest percentage of fracture was of orbital floor (35%) followed by fracture of wall of maxillary sinus (30%) and nasal bone fracture (28.33%). Three cases had simultaneous injury of the globe and cervical spine; they underwent computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of spine. Conclusion: Injuries to maxillofacial region is one of the most common emergency requiring accurate and early diagnosis for preventing unnecessary investigations and proper management. MDCT has high sensitivity and specificity and has high accuracy for detection of fracture. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v5i4.9561 Asian Journal of Medical Sciences 2014 Vol.5(4); 39-43

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multidetector computed tomographic evaluation of maxillofacial trauma

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If improperly managed, such injuries can have lasting consequences including permanent asymmetry, disfigurement, malocclusion and enophthalmos (2)(3)(4)(5)(6). Presently, computed tomography (CT) has widely been accepted as the gold standard imaging modality in the diagnosis of facial fractures (7)(8)(9)(10)(11). However, a proper physical examination, devoting special attention to specific facial findings, may permit for earlier diagnosis and triage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Classically, the physical examination was the primary means by which a physician evaluated a patient with facial trauma (12) and whether a patient required surgical intervention (13). As such, certain physical examination findings have been found to correlate with the presence of a facial fracture in the zygoma (12,(14)(15)(16), orbit (8,12,13,16), maxilla (12,14,16,17), mandible (2,12,(18)(19)(20) and nasal bone (12,21). Despite this, these findings have not been systematically tested against the CT scan to determine which findings are the most predictive of true and significant facial fractures in trauma patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%