Locking Versus Non-Locking Plate Fixation in the Management of Maxillofacial Fractures: A Prospective Comparative Study

N. Verma, N. Mann, Jaspreet Kaur, S. Gill
{"title":"Locking Versus Non-Locking Plate Fixation in the Management of Maxillofacial Fractures: A Prospective Comparative Study","authors":"N. Verma, N. Mann, Jaspreet Kaur, S. Gill","doi":"10.5958/2321-1024.2019.00017.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction \nVarious methods of fixation have been advocated for the treatment of maxillofacial fractures. A new type of plating system, initially developed by Raveh et al. is locking plate/screw system. This system has various advantages over conventional non locking plating system like better stability, ease of plate adaptation, early restoration of function, internal locking system which decreases the chance of screw loosening and infection. \nObjectives \nA comparative evaluation of locking plates system versus conventional miniplates in maxillofacial fractures. \nMethod \nTwenty patients presenting with maxillofacial fractures were treated with locking plates and conventional non locking plates in two years from 2014 to 2016. Ten patients were treated with locking plate system in group A and 10 patients with conventional non locking plates in group B. Patients were evaluated on clinical and radiographic parameters during three months follow up. \nResults \nPostoperative outcomes for both groups were extremely favorable with a relatively small number of complications. There was no case of postoperative wound dehiscence, infection, damage to tooth roots, plate exposure and plate removal, malunion and any other complication in both the groups. Postoperative occlusion disturbance was seen in 20% cases in both group A as well as group B in mandible fractures. In maxillary fractures postoperative occlusion disturbance was seen in one case (20%) in group B. \nConclusion \nThis study concluded that despite the significant theoretical advantages of locking system seen in biomechanical studies, no statistical significant results were found between these two systems. The postoperative outcomes for both groups were almost similar with a relatively small number of complications.","PeriodicalId":113416,"journal":{"name":"International journal of contemporary surgery","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of contemporary surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-1024.2019.00017.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Various methods of fixation have been advocated for the treatment of maxillofacial fractures. A new type of plating system, initially developed by Raveh et al. is locking plate/screw system. This system has various advantages over conventional non locking plating system like better stability, ease of plate adaptation, early restoration of function, internal locking system which decreases the chance of screw loosening and infection. Objectives A comparative evaluation of locking plates system versus conventional miniplates in maxillofacial fractures. Method Twenty patients presenting with maxillofacial fractures were treated with locking plates and conventional non locking plates in two years from 2014 to 2016. Ten patients were treated with locking plate system in group A and 10 patients with conventional non locking plates in group B. Patients were evaluated on clinical and radiographic parameters during three months follow up. Results Postoperative outcomes for both groups were extremely favorable with a relatively small number of complications. There was no case of postoperative wound dehiscence, infection, damage to tooth roots, plate exposure and plate removal, malunion and any other complication in both the groups. Postoperative occlusion disturbance was seen in 20% cases in both group A as well as group B in mandible fractures. In maxillary fractures postoperative occlusion disturbance was seen in one case (20%) in group B. Conclusion This study concluded that despite the significant theoretical advantages of locking system seen in biomechanical studies, no statistical significant results were found between these two systems. The postoperative outcomes for both groups were almost similar with a relatively small number of complications.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
锁定与非锁定钢板固定治疗颌面骨折:前瞻性比较研究
介绍颌面骨折的治疗方法有多种。一种新型的电镀系统,最初是由Raveh等人开发的锁定板/螺钉系统。与传统的非锁定钢板系统相比,该系统具有更好的稳定性,易于钢板适应,功能早期恢复,内部锁定系统减少螺钉松动和感染的机会等优点。目的对锁定钢板系统与常规微型钢板在颌面部骨折中的应用进行比较评价。方法对2014 ~ 2016年2年内收治的20例颌面部骨折患者分别应用锁定钢板和常规非锁定钢板进行治疗。A组10例患者采用锁定钢板系统治疗,b组10例患者采用常规非锁定钢板治疗,随访3个月,对患者的临床和影像学参数进行评估。结果两组患者术后预后良好,并发症相对较少。两组均无术后创面裂开、感染、牙根损伤、钢板外露、钢板取出、畸形愈合等并发症发生。A组和B组下颌骨骨折术后咬合障碍发生率均为20%。b组1例(20%)上颌骨折术后出现咬合障碍。结论本研究认为,尽管在生物力学研究中,锁定系统具有显著的理论优势,但两种系统之间没有统计学上的显著差异。两组术后结果基本相似,并发症较少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparative Study of Collagen Density, Fibroblast, and Neovascularization in Tracheal Defect Reconstruction with Primary Repair and External Oblique Muscle Aponeurosis Patch (A Novel Study with New Zealand Rabbit) Double Parathyroid Adenoma: Culprit Behind A Non- Functioning Kidney Role of Probiotics in Reducing GERD Effects of Immediate Post Operative Orthopaedic Rehabilitation in Lower Limb Open Reduction Internal Fixation’s Orthopaedic Surgeries to Reduce Fear Avoidance Behaviour and Early Ambulation To Study the Repair of Incisional Hernia by Preperitoneal Meshplasty
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1