The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ahmed, Shaheen
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Usmani, Reema, Shaikh, Abdul Hafeez, Ashraf, Usman, Iqbal, Syeda Noureen, Salman, Abdullah, Ali, Anwar
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8661443
Resumo: Aim: The mandible is regarded as a frequently fractured bone in patients who present with maxillofacial trauma accounting for almost 15.5% to 59% of all facial fractures. Managing condylar trauma has remained to be a point of contention amongst experts, regardless of the advances in surgical modalities and methodologies, and the treatment plan is often determined by the preference and the experience of the surgeon. There exist various approaches in the literature, each with its own specific benefits and drawbacks. With this study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications in patients who experienced ORIF by means of the retromandibular approach, by comparing the outcomes of one group having undergone transparotid surgery, with another that underwent retroparotid surgery. Methods: An experimental trial was undertaken. Convenience sampling was done from among the cases of condylar neck and base fracture visiting the department of OMFS, Dow University of Health Sciences from January 2017 to December 2019. An overall 26 patients were divided into 2 groups of 13 members each; one was managed using Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) by means of a retromandibular transparotid approach while the other group was treated with ORIF by means of a retromandibular retroparotid approach. A 6 month follow-up was done to assess range of active motion, occlusion, and complications such as deviation/deflection, neural injury, infections, sialocele, salivary fistulae and Frey’s syndrome in both groups. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of inter-incisal opening, right and left lateral movements, or protrusion. One patient in the retroparotid group had deviation on mouth opening (7.69%), while one in the transparotid group reported with infection (7.69%), and 2 developed post operative seromas (15.38%). None had persisting facial nerve palsy at 6 months. Conclusion: We find no significant disparity between the 2 approaches at a follow-up of 6 months; therefore, the primary determining factor for selection of either technique is surgeon preference and appropriate case selection.
id UNICAMP-8_02ad05431c52dc6d11014a2eefca7bec
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8661443
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-8
network_name_str Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experienceMandibular fracturesMandibular condyleOral surgical proceduresAim: The mandible is regarded as a frequently fractured bone in patients who present with maxillofacial trauma accounting for almost 15.5% to 59% of all facial fractures. Managing condylar trauma has remained to be a point of contention amongst experts, regardless of the advances in surgical modalities and methodologies, and the treatment plan is often determined by the preference and the experience of the surgeon. There exist various approaches in the literature, each with its own specific benefits and drawbacks. With this study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications in patients who experienced ORIF by means of the retromandibular approach, by comparing the outcomes of one group having undergone transparotid surgery, with another that underwent retroparotid surgery. Methods: An experimental trial was undertaken. Convenience sampling was done from among the cases of condylar neck and base fracture visiting the department of OMFS, Dow University of Health Sciences from January 2017 to December 2019. An overall 26 patients were divided into 2 groups of 13 members each; one was managed using Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) by means of a retromandibular transparotid approach while the other group was treated with ORIF by means of a retromandibular retroparotid approach. A 6 month follow-up was done to assess range of active motion, occlusion, and complications such as deviation/deflection, neural injury, infections, sialocele, salivary fistulae and Frey’s syndrome in both groups. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of inter-incisal opening, right and left lateral movements, or protrusion. One patient in the retroparotid group had deviation on mouth opening (7.69%), while one in the transparotid group reported with infection (7.69%), and 2 developed post operative seromas (15.38%). None had persisting facial nerve palsy at 6 months. Conclusion: We find no significant disparity between the 2 approaches at a follow-up of 6 months; therefore, the primary determining factor for selection of either technique is surgeon preference and appropriate case selection.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2021-02-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/866144310.20396/bjos.v20i00.8661443Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences; v. 20 (2021): Continuous Publication; e211443Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences; Vol. 20 (2021): Continuous Publication; e2114431677-3225reponame:Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPenghttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8661443/25903Pakistan; ContemporanyCopyright (c) 2021 Brazilian Journal of Oral Scienceshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAhmed, Shaheen Usmani, Reema Shaikh, Abdul Hafeez Ashraf, Usman Iqbal, Syeda Noureen Salman, AbdullahAli, Anwar 2021-02-09T13:08:46Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8661443Revistahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/PUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/oaibrjorals@fop.unicamp.br||brjorals@fop.unicamp.br1677-32251677-3217opendoar:2021-02-09T13:08:46Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
title The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
spellingShingle The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
Ahmed, Shaheen
Mandibular fractures
Mandibular condyle
Oral surgical procedures
title_short The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
title_full The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
title_fullStr The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
title_full_unstemmed The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
title_sort The retromandibular transparotid approach vs. retromandibular retroparotid approach for the mandibular condyle: our clinical experience
author Ahmed, Shaheen
author_facet Ahmed, Shaheen
Usmani, Reema
Shaikh, Abdul Hafeez
Ashraf, Usman
Iqbal, Syeda Noureen
Salman, Abdullah
Ali, Anwar
author_role author
author2 Usmani, Reema
Shaikh, Abdul Hafeez
Ashraf, Usman
Iqbal, Syeda Noureen
Salman, Abdullah
Ali, Anwar
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ahmed, Shaheen
Usmani, Reema
Shaikh, Abdul Hafeez
Ashraf, Usman
Iqbal, Syeda Noureen
Salman, Abdullah
Ali, Anwar
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Mandibular fractures
Mandibular condyle
Oral surgical procedures
topic Mandibular fractures
Mandibular condyle
Oral surgical procedures
description Aim: The mandible is regarded as a frequently fractured bone in patients who present with maxillofacial trauma accounting for almost 15.5% to 59% of all facial fractures. Managing condylar trauma has remained to be a point of contention amongst experts, regardless of the advances in surgical modalities and methodologies, and the treatment plan is often determined by the preference and the experience of the surgeon. There exist various approaches in the literature, each with its own specific benefits and drawbacks. With this study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of post-operative complications in patients who experienced ORIF by means of the retromandibular approach, by comparing the outcomes of one group having undergone transparotid surgery, with another that underwent retroparotid surgery. Methods: An experimental trial was undertaken. Convenience sampling was done from among the cases of condylar neck and base fracture visiting the department of OMFS, Dow University of Health Sciences from January 2017 to December 2019. An overall 26 patients were divided into 2 groups of 13 members each; one was managed using Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) by means of a retromandibular transparotid approach while the other group was treated with ORIF by means of a retromandibular retroparotid approach. A 6 month follow-up was done to assess range of active motion, occlusion, and complications such as deviation/deflection, neural injury, infections, sialocele, salivary fistulae and Frey’s syndrome in both groups. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of inter-incisal opening, right and left lateral movements, or protrusion. One patient in the retroparotid group had deviation on mouth opening (7.69%), while one in the transparotid group reported with infection (7.69%), and 2 developed post operative seromas (15.38%). None had persisting facial nerve palsy at 6 months. Conclusion: We find no significant disparity between the 2 approaches at a follow-up of 6 months; therefore, the primary determining factor for selection of either technique is surgeon preference and appropriate case selection.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-02-08
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8661443
10.20396/bjos.v20i00.8661443
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8661443
identifier_str_mv 10.20396/bjos.v20i00.8661443
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/bjos/article/view/8661443/25903
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv Pakistan; Contemporany
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences; v. 20 (2021): Continuous Publication; e211443
Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences; Vol. 20 (2021): Continuous Publication; e211443
1677-3225
reponame:Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)
collection Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian journal of oral sciences (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv brjorals@fop.unicamp.br||brjorals@fop.unicamp.br
_version_ 1800216403583696896