3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Endoscopic-assisted approach in the treatment of subcondylar fractures: our experience Translated title: Abordaje endoscópico en el tratamiento de las fracturas subcondíleas: nuestra experiencia

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          ABSTRACT Introduction: The management of subcondylar fractures has been very controversial in the maxillofacial literature. The open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) technique has been considered by many authors the gold standard in selected cases. However, with the rise in endoscopic techniques in the craniomaxillofacial area, new boundaries and less invasive techniques are being explored. The endoscopic approach of subcondylar fractures has proved overall good and similar results to open approaches whilst reducing complications such as facial nerve injury. In this article we purpose to describe our experience with the endoscopic approach to subcondylar fractures. Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 11 patients with subcondylar fractures treated at our department via an endoscopic approach. The number and type of plates used in each patient is recorded. Results and complications observed for all patients are described as well as functional outcomes in terms of mouth opening at 1 week, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. Results: One patient presented with transient damage to the marginal and frontal branches of the facial nerve. 18.2 % of patients had their hardware removed due to pain or infection at the fracture site. No cases of salivary fistula or sialocele were found in this study. Mean mouth opening at one week postoperatively was 31.8 mm which increased to 37.8 mm at 6 months after surgery, meaning an increase of 18.86 % through the follow-up. Also, 18.2 % of patients presented with persistent deviation with mouth opening and one patient presented with postoperative persistent malocclusion that was treated with intermaxillary fixation and elastics. Conclusion: The endoscopic management of subcondylar fractures is a safe alternative to the open approach, specially in favorable cases, which reduces the risk of complications associated to open approaches, such as unfavorable scarring, salivary gland complications and facial nerve damage. In our series only one patient presented with transient damage to the facial nerve. 18.2 % of the plates were removed, which is a high percentage and should be evaluated, although the small size of the series should be taken into account. Maxillofacial surgeons should be encouraged to learn and trained in endoscopic techniques and include the endoscopic assisted approach in their surgical armamentarium.

          Translated abstract

          RESUMEN Introducción: El manejo de las fracturas subcondíleas ha sido muy controvertido en la literatura maxilofacial. La técnica de reducción abierta y fijación interna (RAFI) ha sido considerada por muchos autores como el gold standard en casos seleccionados. Sin embargo, con el auge de las técnicas endoscópicas en el área craneomaxilofacial se han puesto en marcha técnicas menos invasivas. El abordaje endoscópico de las fracturas subcondíleas ha demostrado en general buenos resultados, similares a los abordajes abiertos, al mismo tiempo que reduce complicaciones como la lesión del nervio facial. En este artículo nos proponemos describir nuestra experiencia con el abordaje endoscópico de las fracturas subcondíleas. Pacientes y métodos: Analizamos retrospectivamente 11 pacientes con fracturas subcondíleas tratados en nuestro servicio mediante abordaje endoscópico. Se recoge el número y tipo de placas utilizadas en cada paciente. Se describen los resultados y las complicaciones observadas para todos los pacientes, así como los resultados funcionales en términos de apertura oral a la semana, 3 meses y 6 meses después de la intervención. Resultados: Un paciente presentó lesión transitoria en las ramas marginal y frontal del nervio facial. Al 18,2 % de los pacientes se les retiraron las placas, por dolor o infección. En este estudio no se encontraron casos de fístula salival o sialocele. La apertura oral media a la semana del postoperatorio fue de 31,8 mm y aumentó a 37,8 mm a los 6 meses de la cirugía, lo que supuso un aumento del 18,86 % durante el seguimiento. Además, el 18,2 % de los pacientes presentó desviación persistente con la apertura de la boca y un paciente presentó maloclusión persistente postoperatoria que fue tratada con bloqueo intermaxilar y elásticos. Conclusión: El manejo endoscópico de las fracturas subcondíleas es una alternativa segura al abordaje abierto, especialmente en casos favorables, lo que reduce el riesgo de complicaciones asociadas a los abordajes abiertos, como cicatrización desfavorable, complicaciones de las glándulas salivales y daño del nervio facial. En nuestra serie solo un paciente presentó daño transitorio del nervio facial. Un 18,2 % de las placas se retiraron, lo que es un porcentaje elevado y debe ser evaluado, aunque debe tenerse en cuenta el tamaño reducido de la serie. Se debe alentar a los cirujanos maxilofaciales a que aprendan y se capaciten en técnicas endoscópicas e incluyan el abordaje asistido por endoscopia en su armamento quirúrgico.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Ten years of mandibular fractures: an analysis of 2,137 cases.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Open versus closed reduction of adult mandibular condyle fractures: a review of the literature regarding the evolution of current thoughts on management.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Open reduction and internal fixation versus closed treatment and mandibulomaxillary fixation of fractures of the mandibular condylar process: a randomized, prospective, multicenter study with special evaluation of fracture level.

              This randomized, clinical multicenter trial investigated the treatment outcomes of displaced condylar fractures, and whether radiographic fracture level was a prognostic factor in therapeutic decision-making between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus closed reduction and mandibulomaxillary fixation (CRMMF).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                maxi
                Revista Española de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial
                Rev Esp Cirug Oral y Maxilofac
                Sociedad Española de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial y de Cabeza y Cuello (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                1130-0558
                2173-9161
                March 2022
                : 44
                : 1
                : 16-22
                Affiliations
                [1] Madrid orgnameHospital Universitario La Paz orgdiv1Servicio de Cirugía Oral y Maxilofacial España
                Article
                S1130-05582022000100016 S1130-0558(22)04400100016
                10.20986/recom.2022.1225/2020
                979a0770-6b52-455f-8237-6d73835a9127

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 17 March 2022
                : 14 November 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 21, Pages: 7
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Originals

                Subcondylar fractures,Fracturas subcondíleas,abordaje endoscópico,endoscopic approach

                Comments

                Comment on this article