Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Published in: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2/2018

01-06-2018 | Original Article

Comparison of single versus two non-compression miniplates in the management of unfavourable angle fracture of the mandible: a prospective randomized clinical study

Authors: Anshul Rai, Anuj Jain, Abhay Datarkar

Published in: Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | Issue 2/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of single versus two non-compression miniplates in the management of unfavourable angle fracture of mandible.

Materials and methods

A total of 28 patients who required open reduction of mandibular angle fracture were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I comprised of patients treated with two miniplates and those in group II were treated with single non-compression miniplate. The parameters of assessment were malocclusion, surgical site infection, need for implant removal, duration of surgery, inter-incisal mouth opening and cost of implants used, in both the groups. Statistical analysis was carried out to compare all the parameters.

Results

Out of 14 patients in group II, inadequate reduction was noticed in three patients, whereas screw loosening had occurred in two cases. Screw loosening was always associated with chronic infection. In these cases, hardware removal was deemed necessary. Plate bending was observed in two cases resulting in malocclusion and difficulty in eating. Non-union of fracture occurred in one patient treated in group II. In group I, no plate bending, screw loosening, surgical site infection, non-union or malocclusion was observed. No patient had to undergo implant removal in group I.

Conclusion

In the management of unfavourable mandibular angle fracture, two miniplates must be preferred over the use of single miniplate as using two miniplates results in better results with minimal complications.
Literature
1.
Sirimaharaj W, Pyungtanasup K (2008) The epidemiology of mandibular fractures treated at Chiang Mai University Hospital: a review of 198 cases. J Med Assoc Thail 91:868
2.
Afrooz PN et al (2015) The epidemiology of mandibular fractures in the United States, part 1: a review of 13,142 cases from the US National Trauma Data Bank. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 73:1CrossRef
3.
Barry CP, Kearns GJ (2007) Superior border plating technique in the management of isolated mandibular angle fractures: a retrospective study of 50 consecutive patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 65:1544–1549CrossRefPubMed
4.
Passeri LA, Ellis E III, Sinn DP (1993) Complications of non-rigid fixation of mandibular angle fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 51(22):382–384CrossRefPubMed
5.
Niederdellmann H, Akuamoa-Boat-Eng E, Uhlig G (1981) Lag screw osteosynthesis a new procedure for treating fractures of the mandibular angle. J Oral Surg 39:938PubMed
6.
Champy M, Lodde JP, Schmitt R et al (1978) Mandibular osteosynthesis by miniature screwed plates via a buccal approach. J Maxillofac Surg 6:14–21CrossRefPubMed
7.
Ellis E 3rd (2010) A prospective study of 3 treatment methods for isolated fractures of the mandibular angle. J Oral MaxillofacSurg 68:2743–2754CrossRef
8.
Choi BH, Kim KN, Kang HS (1995) Clinical and in vitro evaluation of mandibular angle fracture fixation with the two-miniplate system. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 79:692–695CrossRefPubMed
9.
Fox AJ, Kellman RM (2003) Mandibular angle fractures: two-miniplate fixation and complications. Arch Facial Plast Surg 5:464–469CrossRefPubMed
10.
Singh V, Gupta M, Bhagol A (2011) Is a single miniplate at the inferior border adequate in the management of an angle fracture of the mandible? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 145:213–216CrossRefPubMed
11.
Mehra P, Murad H (2008) Internal fixation of mandibular angle fractures: a comparison of 2 techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:2254–2260CrossRefPubMed
12.
Yazdani J, Taheri Talesh K, Kalantar Motamedi MH, Khorshidi R, Fekri S, Hajmohammadi S (2013) Mandibular angle fractures: comparison of one miniplate versus two miniplates. Trauma Mon 18:17–20CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Vineeth K, Lalitha RM, Prasad K, Ranganath K, Shwetha V, Singh J (2013) “A comparative evaluation between single noncompression titanium miniplate and three dimensional titanium miniplate in treatment of mandibular angle fracture”—a randomized prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41:103CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ellis E 3rd, Walker L (1994) Treatment of mandibular angle fractures using two noncompression miniplates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 52:1032CrossRefPubMed
15.
Potter J, Ellis E 3rd (1999) Treatment of mandibular angle fractures with a malleable noncompression miniplate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 57:288–292CrossRefPubMed
16.
Ellis E 3rd, Sinn DP (1993) Treatment of mandibular angle fractures using two 2.4-mm dynamic compression plates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 51:969CrossRefPubMed
17.
Levy FE, Smith RW, Odland RM, Marentette LJ (1991) Monocortical miniplate fixation of mandibular angle fractures. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:149–154CrossRefPubMed
18.
Danda AK (2010) Comparison of a single noncompression miniplate versus 2 noncompression miniplates in the treatment of mandibular angle fractures: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:1565–1567CrossRefPubMed
19.
Al-Tairi NH et al (2015) Comparison of three-dimensional plate versus double miniplate osteosynthesis for treatment of unfavorable mandibular angle fractures. Tanta Dental J 12:89–98CrossRef
20.
AbuRagab AM, Elmofty S, Elmorsy K (2004) Treatment of mandibular angle fracture with miniplates [M.Sc. thesis]. Faculty Of Oral and Dental Medicine e Department Of Oral Surgery, Cairo University
21.
Singh V, Khatana S, Bhagol A (2014) Superior border versus inferior border fixation in displaced mandibular angle fractures: prospective randomized comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43(83):834–840CrossRefPubMed
22.
Sugar AW, Gibbons AJ, Patton DW, Silvester KC, Hodder SC, Gray M, Snooks H, Watkins A (2009) A random-ized controlled trial comparing fixation of mandibular angle fractures with a single miniplate placed either transbuccally and intra-orally, or intra-orally alone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 38:241–245CrossRefPubMed
23.
Cillo J, Ellis E III (2014) Management of bilateral mandibular angle fractures with combined rigid and nonrigid fixation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 72:106–111CrossRefPubMed
24.
Choi BH, Yoo JH, Kim NK et al (1995) Stability testing of a two miniplatefixation technique for mandibular angle fractures: an in vitro study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 23:122–125CrossRef
25.
Kuriakose MA, Fardy M, Sirikumara M, Patton DW, Sugar AW (1996) A comparative review of 266 mandibular fractures with internal fixation using rigid (AO/ASIF) plates or mini-plates. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 34:315–321CrossRefPubMed
26.
Schierle HP, Schmelzeisen R, Rahn B, Pytlik C (1997) One- or two-plate fixation of mandibular angle fractures? J Craniomaxillofac Surg 25:162CrossRefPubMed
27.
Champy, M., A. Wilk, J. H. Schnebelen (1975) Die Behandlung von Mandibularfrakturen mittels Osteosynthese ohne intermaxill/ire Ruhigstellung nach der Technik von F. X. Michelet. Zahn-, Mnnd-, Kieferheilk. 63:339
28.
Spiessl B (1989) Biomechanics. In: Spiessl B (ed) Internal fixation of the mandible. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, GermanyCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of single versus two non-compression miniplates in the management of unfavourable angle fracture of the mandible: a prospective randomized clinical study
Authors
Anshul Rai
Anuj Jain
Abhay Datarkar
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 1865-1550
Electronic ISSN: 1865-1569
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-018-0684-z

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2/2018 Go to the issue

Original Article

Clinical evaluation of two dexamethasone regimens in the extractions of impacted third molars—a randomized clinical trial

Original Article

To assess the efficacy of socket plug technique using platelet rich fibrin with or without the use of bone substitute in alveolar ridge preservation: a prospective randomised controlled study

Original Article

Metastases from distant primary tumours on the head and neck: clinical manifestation and diagnostics of 91 cases

Original Article

Comparative evaluation of soft and hard tissue changes following endosseous implant placement using flap and flapless techniques in the posterior edentulous areas of the mandible—a randomized controlled trial

Original Article

Postural assessment in class III patients before and after orthognathic surgery

Original Article

Accuracy of two-dimensional pharyngeal airway space prediction for bimaxillary orthognathic surgery