A comparative evaluation of transbuccal versus transoral approach for the management of mandibular angle fractures: A prospective, clinical, and radiographic study
Introduction: In the facial bones, the angle of the mandible is the common site of fractures. Furthermore, it is the site with the highest number of complications after fracture and hence needs an efficient fixation. The right approach is still debatable for the angle fractures. In the light of thes...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/da9e178804cc4555bb94bf756b0162f7 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Introduction: In the facial bones, the angle of the mandible is the common site of fractures. Furthermore, it is the site with the highest number of complications after fracture and hence needs an efficient fixation. The right approach is still debatable for the angle fractures. In the light of these factors, we evaluated the transoral and the transbuccal approaches for the treatment of fractures at the angle of the mandible. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients were equally divided into two groups of transoral and transbuccal methods. The parameters such as ease of access, surgical time, occlusion, postsurgical infection, fracture gaps, scarring, and complications were noted, and the values that were compared were statistically analyzed. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: No significant variations were seen in the variables such as ease of access, occlusion, postsurgical infection, and fracture gaps. Surgical time was significantly less for the transoral method. Negligible scarring was noted in the transbuccal method. Conclusion: Although both the methods were comparable, the transbuccal approach was more efficient for the mandibular angular fracture treatment. |
|---|