Rastogi Sanjay, Ahmed Tousif, Giri Kolli, Dandriyal Ramakant, Indra B Niranjana Prasad, Joshi Ankur, Choudhury Shouvik, Mall Sunil
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Implantology, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Center, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Dental Sciences, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2018 Jun;11(2):118-123. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1603453. Epub 2017 Jun 8.
The aim of this prospective study was to appraise the role of embrasure wiring in the treatment of mandibular fractures over the arch bar as adjunctive techniques of maxillomandibular fixation (MMF). This study was conducted on 40 patients who were surgically treated for mandibular fractures with accessory use of MMF (embrasure: group A vs. arch bars: group B). All patients were evaluated for demographic data, etiology, and location of fracture. Characteristically, the complications, including wire injury, infection, and malocclusion, were recorded. The data were analyzed using Student's -test and chi-square test as appropriate. Statistical significance was set at < 0.05). In this study, data from 40 patients were included. In group A (embrasure wiring), time required for placement of MMF was significantly less than (7.85 ± 0.81 minutes) that in group B, and also there was less incidence of wire prick to the operator in group A than in group B ( < 0.05). However, in terms of wire prick and malocclusion, no statistically significant difference was noted in groups A and B ( > 0.05). Patient treated with embrasure wiring intermaxillary fixation had better outcomes especially in terms of time of placement and less incidence of wire prick injury when compared with arch bar.
这项前瞻性研究的目的是评估牙间隙结扎丝在下颌骨折治疗中作为颌间固定(MMF)辅助技术替代牙弓夹板的作用。本研究对40例接受下颌骨折手术治疗并辅助使用MMF的患者进行(牙间隙结扎丝:A组 vs. 牙弓夹板:B组)。对所有患者的人口统计学数据、病因及骨折部位进行评估。记录包括钢丝损伤、感染和咬合不正等并发症。根据情况使用学生t检验和卡方检验对数据进行分析。设定统计学显著性水平为P < 0.05。本研究纳入了40例患者的数据。在A组(牙间隙结扎丝)中,放置MMF所需时间显著少于B组(7.85 ± 0.81分钟),且A组操作人员钢丝刺伤的发生率低于B组(P < 0.05)。然而,在钢丝刺伤和咬合不正方面,A组和B组未观察到统计学显著差异(P > 0.05)。与牙弓夹板相比,采用牙间隙结扎丝颌间固定治疗的患者结局更好,尤其是在放置时间和钢丝刺伤发生率方面。