Background and Objectives: Fractures of the jaw can causes malocclusion and widening of the face if ill-treated. Tocompare the results of ORIF (open reduction internal fixation) only versus open reduction internal fixation along withmaxilla-mandibular fixation in the management of mandibular symphysis and parasymphysis fractures.Methodology: In this study, 150 patients were divided into A and B groups (75 each group) by lottery method. Onegroup (A) was treated with ORIF only, while other (B) was treated by ORIF and MMF. Miniplates were placed inaccordance with Champy’s principle.. Each plate was fixed with monocortical screws that were 2-mm wide and 7-mmlong.Results: Our study shows that Group A had a mean age of 30 years with Standard Deviation ± 2.76 whereas the GroupB mean age was 32 years with Standard Deviation ± 3.12. 72% of the patients in Group A were male and 28% werefemale. In the case of Group B 75% patients were male and the remaining 25% were female. In Group A 5% of thepatients had malocclusion, 3% patients had infection and 4% patients had wound dehiscence. 7% of the patients inGroup B had malocclusion, 5% patients had infection and 7% patients had wound dehiscence.Conclusion: Our study concludes that the difference of outcomes (malocclusion, infection, wound dehiscence) betweenopen reduction internal fixation along with maxillomandibular fixation and open reduction internal fixation only in thetreatment of mandibular symphysis and parasymphysis fractures, were not significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iqbal et al. (2022) studied this question.