Risk factors contributing to symptomatic plate removal in maxillofacial trauma patients.
This study analyzed the fate of plates used to correct maxillofacial injuries and defined risk factors that eventually resulted in plate removal. The outpatient clinic files of 108 patients treated with rigid internal fixation after maxillofacial trauma were reviewed. Study variables included age, sex, trauma circumstances, diagnosis, type of fracture, approach to the facial skeleton, presence of teeth in the line of fracture, plate material, site of plates, and reasons for plate removal. Of 204 plates used for fixation, 44 plates (22 percent) were removed. When all factors were considered together, only fracture diagnosis (mandibular body and angle) and plate location (mandibular body and angle) were statistically significant. Only when each factor was considered separately, the approach to the facial skeleton (intraoral) and the type of fracture (comminuted and compound fractures) were statistically associated with plate removal. Selection of favorable plate location, the extraoral approach, and vigilant infection control may reduce plate removal in patients with maxillofacial injuries. Special attention should be given to compound and comminuted fractures of the mandibular body and angle.
Chaushu
G
G
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel. drshaush@netvision.net.il
Manor
Y
Y
Shoshani
Y
Y
Taicher
S
S
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001860:Bone Plates / Q000009:adverse effects*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008446:Maxillofacial Injuries / Q000601:surgery*; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000209:etiology / Q000601:surgery; D012086:Reoperation; D012307:Risk Factors