Condylar Fractures
Conditions
Brief summary
Background: Condylar fracture is one of mandibular fracture which accounts for 20-35%. It is the most controversial fractures regarding diagnosis and management. For several years, surgeons preferred closed reduction over open reduction to avoid surgical complications. Closed reduction may have late complications, the preference started to change towards open treatment. A Transmasseteric Anteroparotid (TMAP) approach for open treatment of condylar fractures overcomes the problems of facial nerve injury of other approaches. Aim: Comparing the Transmasseteric Antroparotid approach(TMAP) to the Transparotid (TP) approach in management of subcondylar fractures regarding the facial nerve affection, parotid fistula, reduction angulation, pain, duration of the surgery, occlusion and patient satisfaction with the scar. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with subcondylar fracture will be divided randomly into two equal groups. Group1(study group): Transmasseteric Antroparotid approach. Group2 (control group): Retromandibular Transparotid approach. Patients will be followed up for 3 months to assess facial nerve injury, pain, occlusion and patient's scar satisfaction . Results: data will be collected, tabulated and statistically analysed.
Interventions
PROCEDUREtransmasseteric anteroparotid approach
safer approach for condylar fracture
PROCEDUREtransparotid approach
facial nerve and parotid dissection to reach condyle
Sponsors
Alexandria University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 50 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Patients suffering from displaced extracapsular mandibular subcondylar fracture indicated for open reduction including: Difficulty of obtaining adequate occlusion by closed method. Radiological signs of the following: 1. Deviation of the he fragments from the axis of the ascending ramus in medial or lateral direction more than 10°. (28) 2. Shortening of the ascending ramus ≥ 2 mm measured from the roof of glenoid fossa to the inferior border of the ascending ramus of the mandible. 3. Dislocation of the condyle from the glenoid fossa.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients who were not able to follow the information given or to make a decision themselves due to mental or other problems. 2. Patient with undisplaced condylar fractures that doesn't cause malocclusion or loss of facial heightening and can be treated conservatively.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| facial nerve injury | immediate postoperative |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| approach time | interaoperative |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed