الفهرس 
Anatomy of the mandibleOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 194 |  |  |
| | | from | 194 | | |
Abstract
Mandibular fractures, including fractures of the subcondylar and
condylar regions, are common facial fractures . Sub condylar fractures
account for 20–62% of all mandibular fractures. But their management
remains controversial .
Although closed reduction is the most useful method, it can be
difficult to achieve anatomical reduction with this technique compared
with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF).
Among the numerous surgical methods that can be used in the
treatment of subcondylar fracture ,, extraoral rather than intraoral
approaches are generally preferred because they can be provided a
sufficient surgical vision. However, compared with intraoral approaches,
extraoral approaches commonly have a high rate of postoperative
complications, such as salivary fistula formation, visible scarring, and
facial nerve injury.
The most surgeons agreed the consensus that the proper surgical
indications for ORIF are the displaced bilateral or unilateral fractures of
the mandibular condylar neck or subcondyle.
Therefore, in this study we will compare the clinical results achieved
with different intraoral approach using an angulated screwdriver,transparotid and retromandibular approaches in patients with
subcondylar fractures of the mandible
The main results of the study revealed that:
As demonstrated in Figure 2, male patients accounted for 71.4%, 57.1%, and
66.7% of groups A, B, and C, respectively. On the other hand, female
patients accounted for 28.6%, 42.9%, and 33.3% of groups A, B, and C,
respectively.
As shown in Table 3, no statistically significant difference was found
between groups regarding gender distribution (Chi-square test, P = 0.850).
As demonstrated in Figure 3, right side was involved in four (57.1%), five
(71.4%), and four (66.7%) patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively.
Left side was involved in two (28.6%)in group A, one (14.3%) in group B,
and two (33.3%) patients in group C.
Bilateral involvement was reported in one (14.3%) patient in group A, and
one (14.3%) patient in group B.
As shown in Table 4, no statistically significant difference was found
between groups regarding side distribution (Chi-square test, P = 0.828).
As demonstrated in Figure 4, RTA was reported in five (74.1%), four
(57.1%), and three (50%) patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively.
FFH was reported in two (28.6%) patients in group A, two (28.6%) in group
B, and two (33.3%) in group C.
Assault was reported in one (14.3%) patient in group B, and one (14.3%)
patient in group C.
As shown in Table 5, no statistically significant difference was found
between groups regarding mechanism of injury (Chi-square test, P = 0.846).
As demonstrated in Figure 5, deviated fracture was observed in two
(28.6%), three (42.9%), and two (28.6%) patients in groups A, B, and C,
respectively.
Displaced fractures were reported in four (57.1%) patients in group A, two
(28.6%) in group B, and three (50%) in group C.
Dislocation was reported in one (14.3%) patient in group A, two (28.6%)
patients in group B, and one (16.7%) patient in group C.
As shown in Table 6, no statistically significant difference was found
between groups regarding Lindahl classification (Chi-square test, P =
0.862).
As demonstrated in Figure 6, closed fracture accounted for 71.4%, 57.1%,
and 66.7% of groups A, B, and C, respectively. On the other hand, open
fracture was reported in 28.6%, 42.9%, and 33.3% of groups A, B, and C,
respectively. As shown in Table 7, no statistically significant difference was
found between groups regarding fracture type (Chi-square test, P = 0.776).
As demonstrated in Figure 7, isolated subcondylar mandibular fractures
were reported in three (42.9%), three (42.9%), and three (50%) patients in
groups A, B, and C, respectively.
Associated symphyseal fractures were reported in two (28.6%) patients in
group A, one (14.3%) patient in group B, and one (16.7%) patient in group
C.
Associated parasymphyseal fractures were reported in two (28.6%) patients
in group A, three (42.9%) patients in group B, and two (33.3%) patients in
group C.