A comprehensive classification of midfacial/craniofacial fractures, based on two- and three-dimensional computed tomography (2D and 3D-CT) is presented. We performed a postmortem analysis of 24 patients who had died from trauma with signs of craniofacial fractures, based on 2D and 3D-CT studies with pathoanatomical findings. In addition, CT findings for 100 patients with craniofacial injuries requiring an emergency CT were correlated with surgical findings and follow-up results. On the basis of the analysis of a total of 377 fractures a classification system is proposed. The system is based on the use of the AO/ASIF (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Association for the Study of Internal Fixation) scheme, defining three types (A, B, C), three groups within each type (e.g. A1, A2, A3) and three subgroups within each group (e.g. A1.1, A1.2, A1.3) with increasing severity from A1.1 (lowest) to C3.3 (highest). The craniofacial region is divided into three units: the lower midface (I), the upper midface (II) and the craniobasal-facial unit (III). Lateral and central fractures are also distinguished. Type A fractures are non-displaced fractures, type B are displaced fractures and type C are complex/defect fractures. Groups A1, B1 and C1 comprise fractures of an isolated unit; groups A2, B2 and C2, combined fractures without involvement of the skull base; and groups A3, B3 and C3 are those combined fractures with involvement of the skull base. A correlation between the severity of the fracture and (i). the number of posttraumatic functional limitations (Spearman rank test, correlation coefficient r=0.42), (ii). the need for bone grafting or dural plastic (r=0.39) and (iii). facial asymmetry (r=0.37), was observed. The proposed classification system allows standardised documentation of midfacial and craniofacial fractures, including those not precisely defined by the Le Fort classification scheme.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0020-1383(02)00119-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fractures
13
craniofacial fractures
12
comprehensive classification
8
two- three-dimensional
8
three-dimensional computed
8
computed tomography
8
fractures based
8
classification system
8
fractures type
8
groups combined
8

Similar Publications

Importance: Fragility fractures result in significant morbidity.

Objective: To review evidence on osteoporosis screening to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and trial registries through January 9, 2024; references, experts, and literature surveillance through July 31, 2024.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Importance: Osteoporotic fractures are associated with psychological distress, subsequent fractures, loss of independence, reduced ability to perform activities of daily living, and death.

Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for osteoporosis to prevent fractures in adults 40 years or older with no known diagnosis of osteoporosis or history of fragility fracture.

Population: Adults 40 years or older without known osteoporosis or history of fragility fractures.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: This study aims to analyze adverse drug events (ADE) related to romosozumab from the second quarter of 2019 to the third quarter of 2023 from FAERS database.

Methods: The ADE data related to romosozumab from 2019 Q2 to 2023 Q3 were collected. After data normalization, four signal strength quantification algorithms were used: ROR (Reporting Odds Ratios), PRR (Proportional Reporting Ratios), BCPNN (Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network), and EBGM (Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!