Comparison of Two-Point and Three-Point Fixation Techniques for Cheekbone (Zygomatic) Fractures

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF 2-POINT VS 3 POINT FIXATION IN THE TREATMENT OF ZYGOMATIOCMAXILLARY COMPLEX FRACTURE- A PROSPECTIVE STUDY. - Nil

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2026/04/109371

Enrollment

Registered

2026-04-27

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: S024- Fracture of malar, maxillary and zygoma bones Health Condition 2: O- Medical and Surgical

Interventions

Intervention1: 2 point vs 3 point fixation: A standardized treatment algorithm for zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures focuses on achieving precise anatomical reduction with minimal fixation.

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Displaced zygomatic bone fracture evident on radiographic imaging (paranasal sinus or submentovertex view). 2. Presentation within 72 hours of injury. 3. Patient consent to treatment.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patients with systemic disease contraindicating general anesthesia. 2. Blowout fracture requiring an additional procedure for reconstruction of the orbital floor and associated midface fracture. 3. Bilaterally displaced zygomatic fracture. 4. Gunshot wound fracture. 5. Patients with a history of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures or osteotomies involving the infraorbital foramen.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To compare clinical, functional, aesthetic, and radiographic outcomes of two- versus threepoint miniplate fixation in displaced zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures.Timepoint: after 1 week then 4 weeks and 3 months.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. To evaluate postoperative facial symmetry & malar prominence following two- & threepoint fixation. 2. To assess functional outcomes, including mouth opening & ophthalmologic parameters such as diplopia, dystopia, & enophthalmos. 3. To compare radiographic stability & alignment of the zygomaticomaxillary complex between the two fixation techniques. 4. To determine whether two-point fixation yields outcomes comparable to those of three-point fixation in selected ZMC fractures.Timepoint: after 1 week, then 4 weeks & then 3 months	—

Measure

Time frame

1. To evaluate postoperative facial symmetry & malar prominence following two- & threepoint fixation. 2. To assess functional outcomes, including mouth opening & ophthalmologic parameters such as diplopia, dystopia, & enophthalmos. 3. To compare radiographic stability & alignment of the zygomaticomaxillary complex between the two fixation techniques. 4. To determine whether two-point fixation yields outcomes comparable to those of three-point fixation in selected ZMC fractures.Timepoint: after 1 week, then 4 weeks & then 3 months

—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Deepak kumar

Govt. college of Dentistry of Indore

dk.vishwakarma31@gmail.com8447266904

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 11, 2026