Fractures Associated with Maxillofacial Trauma

Authors

  • Cristian DINU Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Ionuţ MARELE Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Oana ALMĂŞAN Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Raluca ROMAN Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Mihaela BĂCIUŢ Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Mihaela HEDEŞIU Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 37 Cardinal Iuliu Hossu Street, 400006 Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Keywords:

Maxillofacial trauma, Fracture, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT), Treatment

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the number of maxillofacial fractures and their characteristics. Materials and methods: A retrospective, analytical, and observational study was performed. The research was conducted over a one-and-a-half-year period, between January 2017 to August 2018. The inclusion criteria were the presence of fracture on a radiological examination. The exclusion criteria were the absence of a maxillofacial fracture as well as patients with incomplete data. Age, gender, place of residence, diagnosis, concomitant fractures, the origin of trauma, imaging examinations, type of surgical therapy, and the number of days of hospitalization were assessed. Results: The data for this study originated from the results of observations of 139 patients hospitalized at the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinic. The sample's mean age was 35.53 years (SD: 17.45 years), and 86.3% of the subjects were males. Seventy-one cases (51.08%) were from urban areas. Fracture of the mandible (n=78; 56.1%) was the most common diagnosis, followed by fracture of the zygomatic bone (n=33; 23.74%). The most common associated fractures were fractures of the mandible in multiple locations (37.05%) and the LeFort fracture type (n=7, 5%). Aggression was the most prevalent etiological cause (48.2%), followed by accidental falls (23%). For the duration of the patients’ hospitalization, the mean occupancy rate was 3.31 days. Treatment comprised closed fracture reduction (41.2% of patients), followed by open reduction and immobilization in 29% of the subjects. Conclusions: Current treatment approaches and developing prevention strategies are essential for trauma outcomes and patients’ quality of life.

Downloads

Published

30.06.2022

How to Cite

1.
DINU C, MARELE I, ALMĂŞAN O, ROMAN R, BĂCIUŢ M, HEDEŞIU M. Fractures Associated with Maxillofacial Trauma. Appl Med Inform [Internet]. 2022 Jun. 30 [cited 2024 Apr. 12];44(2):48-56. Available from: https://ami.info.umfcluj.ro/index.php/AMI/article/view/905

Issue

Section

Articles