A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The effect of an interfragmentary gap on the clinical outcome after mandibular angle fracture surgery. | LitMetric

Background/aim: The mandibular angle fracture occasionally widens at the lower border after surgery using a single miniplate. However, the effects of an interfragmentary gap have not been fully investigated. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of gaps caused by mandibular angle fracture surgery using a single superior border miniplate technique.

Material And Methods: In this prospective study, the interfragmentary gap was measured by panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) postoperatively. The width of the gap measured by panoramic radiography and CBCT scans was compared. The patients were divided into two groups based on the gap width (more or less than 1.5 mm). In CBCT scans, bucco-lingual displacement of the proximal segment was evaluated. Clinical results and complication rates were investigated according to the gap and displacement. The findings were statistically analyzed.

Results: Thirty-two patients were included in the study. The mean interfragmentary gap widths were 1.56 ± 0.83 mm by panoramic radiography and 2.12 ± 0.87 mm by CBCT scans. CBCT measured a gap width of approximately 0.5 mm wider than panoramic radiography (P = 0.001). Twenty-two patients (68.8%) had an interfragmentary gap width of >1.5 mm, and ten patients (31.2%) had a gap width of <1.5 mm. All patients had favorable occlusion at the last clinical examination. There were no statistically significant differences in intermaxillary fixation periods and complication rates (P > 0.05). One patient in the wider gap group experienced pain in the temporomandibular joint when opening the mouth. Six patients (18.8%) had lingual displacement of the proximal fragment. Displacement did not significantly influence the complication rate (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: The presence of an interfragmentary gap after mandibular angle fracture surgery did not affect the clinical outcome.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/edt.12300DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interfragmentary gap
24
mandibular angle
16
angle fracture
16
panoramic radiography
16
gap width
16
fracture surgery
12
cbct scans
12
gap
11
clinical outcome
8
surgery single
8

Similar Publications

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!