Scoring mandibular fractures: a tool for staging diagnosis, planning treatment, and predicting prognosis.

F. Carinci, L. Arduin, F. Pagliaro, I. Zollino, G. Brunelli, R. Cenzi
{"title":"Scoring mandibular fractures: a tool for staging diagnosis, planning treatment, and predicting prognosis.","authors":"F. Carinci, L. Arduin, F. Pagliaro, I. Zollino, G. Brunelli, R. Cenzi","doi":"10.1097/TA.0b013e318194560b","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND Mandibular fractures (MF) are a daily problem in maxillofacial surgery. A staging system for classifying MF is of paramount importance to plan surgery, to define prognosis, and to exchange information among trauma centers. In this article, a classification for MF is proposed. METHODS The mandible is divided into six sites (symphysis, body, angle, ramus, coronoid, and condyle) and the mandibular nerve divides the alveolar process (i.e., the upper part containing teeth) from the basal bone (placed caudally with respect to the nerve). MF can be summarized using three abbreviations: A = alveolar, B = basal, and C = complete. Consequently, MFs are staged as follows: F in situ = a greenstick fracture; F1 = a single mobile fragment of alveolar or basal bone; F2 = double mobile fractures of the alveolar or basal portion or a single complete separation of the mandibular arch continuity; F3 = a complete double separation of the mandibular arch continuity; F4 = triple or more mandibular arch fragments. To evaluate the suitability of the proposed classification, a retrospective study on a series of 128 patients (and 205 MFs) was performed. Age, gender, stage, clinical diagnosis at admission, type of surgery, and outcome were considered. RESULTS A good correlation between the proposed classification and the studied variables was detected. CONCLUSIONS The new classification is a simple and precise method for staging MF. It can summarize MFs and be used in daily practice. It is our understanding, however, that a multicenter study should be performed before the effectiveness of the proposed classification can be clearly stated.","PeriodicalId":92962,"journal":{"name":"The journal of cardiothoracic trauma","volume":"317 1","pages":"215-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of cardiothoracic trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e318194560b","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

BACKGROUND Mandibular fractures (MF) are a daily problem in maxillofacial surgery. A staging system for classifying MF is of paramount importance to plan surgery, to define prognosis, and to exchange information among trauma centers. In this article, a classification for MF is proposed. METHODS The mandible is divided into six sites (symphysis, body, angle, ramus, coronoid, and condyle) and the mandibular nerve divides the alveolar process (i.e., the upper part containing teeth) from the basal bone (placed caudally with respect to the nerve). MF can be summarized using three abbreviations: A = alveolar, B = basal, and C = complete. Consequently, MFs are staged as follows: F in situ = a greenstick fracture; F1 = a single mobile fragment of alveolar or basal bone; F2 = double mobile fractures of the alveolar or basal portion or a single complete separation of the mandibular arch continuity; F3 = a complete double separation of the mandibular arch continuity; F4 = triple or more mandibular arch fragments. To evaluate the suitability of the proposed classification, a retrospective study on a series of 128 patients (and 205 MFs) was performed. Age, gender, stage, clinical diagnosis at admission, type of surgery, and outcome were considered. RESULTS A good correlation between the proposed classification and the studied variables was detected. CONCLUSIONS The new classification is a simple and precise method for staging MF. It can summarize MFs and be used in daily practice. It is our understanding, however, that a multicenter study should be performed before the effectiveness of the proposed classification can be clearly stated.
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
下颌骨折评分:分期诊断、计划治疗和预测预后的工具。
背景:下颌骨折是颌面外科的常见问题。对MF进行分类的分期系统对于计划手术、确定预后以及在创伤中心之间交换信息至关重要。本文提出了一种MF的分类方法。方法下颌骨分为六个部位(联合、体、角、支、冠状和髁),下颌神经将牙槽突(即含牙的上部)与基骨(相对于神经位于尾部)分开。MF可以用三个缩写来概括:A =肺泡,B =基底,C =完全。因此,MFs的分级如下:原位F =绿枝裂缝;F1 =单个可移动的牙槽骨或基底骨碎片;F2 =双牙槽部或基底部活动骨折或单次下颌弓连续性完全分离;F3 =完全双分离的下颌弓连续性;F4 =三个或更多的下颌弓碎片。为了评估所提出的分类的适用性,对128例患者(205例MFs)进行了回顾性研究。考虑年龄、性别、分期、入院时的临床诊断、手术类型和结果。结果所提出的分类方法与所研究的变量具有良好的相关性。结论该方法是一种简便、准确的MF分期方法。它可以总结MFs,并在日常实践中使用。然而,我们的理解是,在明确提出的分类的有效性之前,应该进行多中心研究。
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
Minimal invasive approach for rib fractures: Feasibility and safety in a single-center experience Is flail chest correctly defined: A new definition is suggested Factors associated with early complications of surgical management due to penetrating laryngotracheal trauma in Colombia Posttraumatic pulmonary abscess Postoperative outcomes following surgical stabilization of rib fractures stratified by 5-factor modified frailty index
×
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