Compare between intraorala and extraoral approaches of subcondylar mandibular fracture management

Abstract

Background: 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). Aim of the work: To compare between intraoral and extraoral approaches in management of submandibular fracture. Patients and methods: This comparative study was conducted in the plastic surgery department, Faculty of medicine-Menoufia University on 20 patients complaining of sub condylar fracture of mandible. Patients were classified into two groups based on surgical approach: Group A: included ten patients undergoing surgical fixation via the intraoral approach. Group B: included ten patients undergoing surgical fixation via extraoral approach Group. Results: A statistically significant difference was found between groups regarding operating and time. Intraoral approach had a signifcanlty longer operating time compared to extraoral. A statistically significant difference was found between groups regarding interincisal distance. Intraoral approach had a significantly larger interincisal distance compared to extraoral approaches. A statistically significant difference was found between groups regrading field of exposure extraoral have wide field of exposure.