Outcome of Open Versus Closed Reduction of Unilateral Mandibular Sub-Condylar Fracture: Open Versus Closed Reduction of Unilateral Mandibular Sub-Condylar Fracture

Sidra Kanwal; Muhammad Shahzad; Ameer Hamza; Amna Sanober; Awais Akbar; Mansoor Ahmed Channa

doi:10.54393/pjhs.v6i2.1877

Authors

Sidra Kanwal Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan
Muhammad Shahzad Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan
Ameer Hamza Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Muhammad Dental College, Mirpurkhas, Pakistan
Amna Sanober Department of Plastic Surgery, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan
Awais Akbar Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Fatima Jinnah Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan
Mansoor Ahmed Channa Department of Periodontology, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v6i2.1877

Keywords:

Unilateral Mandibular, Condylar Fractures, Reduction, Occlusion and Mouth Opening

Abstract

Condylar fractures are among the most common types in the maxillofacial area, yet their optimal treatment approach remains debated. Objectives: To compare occlusion and mouth opening between open and closed reduction for unilateral mandibular sub-condylar fractures in adults. Methods: This quasi-experimental study was conducted on 68 patients in Jamshoro using a non-probability sampling technique. Patients aged 18–50 years with unilateral non-comminuted sub-condylar fractures within 48 hours and sufficient dentition for fixation were included, while those with bilateral fractures, undisplaced condyles, or other exclusion criteria were excluded. Participants were divided into two groups: Group A underwent closed reduction with maxillomandibular fixation, and Group B underwent open reduction with internal fixation using titanium mini-plates under general anesthesia. Occlusion, range of motion, and mouth opening were evaluated at 3-month follow-ups. Results: Pre-operative assessments showed limited mouth opening (15–20 mm) in 97.1% and 100%, poor occlusion in 100%, and poor range of motion in 100% of patients in both groups. Post-operatively, mouth opening improved to 20–30 mm in 8.8% vs. 67.6% and 30–45 mm in 73.5% vs. 85.3%. Good occlusion improved to 58.8%, 88.2%, and 97.1% in Group A vs. 82.4%, 94.1%, and 100% in Group B over 1, 2, and 3 months, respectively. Range of motion also improved, reaching 94.1% vs. 100% by the 3rd month. Conclusions: It was concluded that open reduction with internal fixation was a superior therapeutic option compared to closed reduction for unilateral mandibular sub-condylar fractures

References

Kanala S, Gudipalli S, Perumalla P, Jagalanki K, Polamarasetty PV, Guntaka S et al. Aetiology, Prevalence, Fracture Site and Management of Maxillofacial Trauma. The Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2021 Jan; 103(1): 18-22. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2020.0171.

Brown JS, Khan A, Wareing S, Schache AG. A New Classification of Mandibular Fractures. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2022 Jan; 51(1): 78-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.02.012.

Kozakiewicz M and Walczyk A. Current frequency of Mandibular Condylar Process Fractures. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023 Feb; 12(4): 1394. doi: 10.3390/jcm12041394.

Barsoum N, El-Wahed A, Nabil Helmi Y. Incidence, Pattern, Etiology of Facial Fractures Among Two Referral Centers (Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study). Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2024 Apr; 15(2): 27-47. doi: 10.21608/OMX.2024.268653.1222.

Gibstein AR, Chen K, Nakfoor B, Gargano F, Bradley JP. Mandibular Sub-Condylar Fracture: Improved Functional Outcomes in Selected Patients with Open Treatment. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2021 Sep; 148(3): 398e-406e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008294.

Memon Z, Naz S, Shaikh AG, Siyal ZH, Shams S. Treatment of Mandibular Condyle Fracture-A Comparison of Two Protocols. The Professional Medical Journal. 2020 Oct; 27(10): 2176-81. doi: 10.29309/TPMJ/2020.27.10.4310.

Mooney S, Gulati RD, Yusupov S, Butts SC. Mandibular Condylar Fractures. Facial Plastic Surgery Clinics. 2022 Feb; 30(1): 85-98. doi: 10.1016/j.fsc.2021.08.007.

Lim J, Jo W, Jeon H, Song SI, Lee JK. Condylar Position Changes and Prognosis in Patients with Unilateral Mandibular Condylar Fracture Treated Non-Surgically. Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2024 Dec; 46(1): 42. doi: 10.1186/s40902-024-00454-5.

Sharma G, Shukla D, Bhola N. An Isolated Unilateral Condylar Head Fracture in an Adult Female: A Case Report. Cureus. 2024 Jun; 16(6). doi: 10.7759/cureus.62813.

Jazayeri HE, Lopez J, Khavanin N, Xun H, Lee UK, Best DL et al. Comparative Benefits of Open Versus Closed Reduction of Condylar Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2023 Apr; 151(4): 664e-72e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010009.

Punga R and Gaur S. Let Bilateral Condylar Fracture Fixation Be the Norm and Not a Choice. Cureus. 2022 May; 14(5). doi: 10.7759/cureus.25492.

Cabral LC, Alves GM, Furtado LM, Neto AJ, Júnior PC. Changes in Mandibular and Articular Dynamics Associated with Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment of Mandibular Condylar Fractures: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology. 2020 Apr; 129(4): 311-21. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2019.10.010.

Prakash Sr R, Ramesh K, Alwala AM, Porika R, Katkuri S, Prakash R et al. Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Versus Closed Reduction and Maxillomandibular Fixation of Condylar Fractures of the Mandible: A Prospective Study. Cureus. 2022 Jan; 14(1). doi: 10.7759/cureus.21186.

Monarchi G, Catarzi L, Paglianiti M, Valassina D, Balercia P, Consorti G. A Comparative Analysis of Surgical and Conservative Management in Intra-Articular Condylar Fractures: A Retrospective Study. Surgeries. 2024 Nov; 5(4): 1033-42. doi: 10.3390/surgeries5040083.

Palanivel I, Narayanan V, Chandran S, Ramakrishnan K, Gurram P. Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Condylar Head/Diacapitular Fracture of Mandible: Case Series. Journal of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery. 2021 Sep; 20: 404-8. doi: 10.1007/s12663-020-01436-6.

Weng L, Cao Y, Zhang G, Zhou H, Liu X, Zhang Y. Response “Commentary: A Comparative Study On Closed Reduction Vs. Open Reduction: Techniques in the Surgical Treatment of Rotated Lateral Condyle Fractures of the Distal Humerus in Children”. Frontiers in Pediatrics. 2023 Sep; 11: 1191933. doi: 10.3389/fped.2023.1191933.

Hassan SG, Shams S, Rehman M, Kumar S. Mandibular Condyle Fractures: A 2 Years Study at Liaquat University Hospital. The Professional Medical Journal. 2016 Jun; 23(06): 705-8. doi: 10.17957/TPMJ/16.2905.

Hakim TA, Shah AA, Farooq S, Kosar S, Gul S, Mehmood N. Unilateral Sub-Condylar and Condylar Neck Fractures: Randomized Clinical Study. Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery. 2018 Jan; 8(1): 3-9. doi: 10.4103/ams.ams_166_17.

Balouch SS, Sohail R, Awais S, Warraich RA, Sajid MI. Comparison of Functional Outcome After Open and Closed Reduction of Mandibular Sub-Condylar Fracture. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association. 2020; 70(2108).

Patel HB, Desai NN, Matariya RG, Makwana KG, Movaniya PN. Unilateral Condylar Fracture with Review of Treatment Modalities in 30 Cases-An Evaluative Study. Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery. 2021 Jan; 11(1): 37-41. doi: 10.4103/ams.ams_312_20.