Treatment of mandibular condyle fracture - a comparison of two protocols.

Objectives: To compare the outcome of two protocols (open reduction and closed reduction) in the treatment of mandibular condyle fracture. Study Design: Comparative study. Setting: Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Dentistry, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro. Period: January 2016 to September 2016. Material & Methods: After selection of patient into either group, for closed reduction technique, maxillomandibular fixation was applied for 4-6 weeks. For open reduction, a preauricular incision was given and fracture was reduced and fixed with miniplates after achieving the normal occlusion. Post operatively, patients of both the group were recalled after one, two and three months for the assessment of the functional effects such as occlusion and range of motion in both groups. Results: Mean age of the patients was29.80+4.42 years in group 1 (open reduction group), while mean age of the group 2 (closed reduction group) was 23.95+6.63 years. Male were in the majority in both groups 17 in group 1 and 16 in group 2. Out of 20 patients in group 1, 11 patients had condylar neck fracture and 9 had subcondyle fracture. While in group 2, 13 patients had subcondyle fracture and 7 had condylar neck fracture. In both groups again no significant difference was found according to location of the fracture (p-value 0.20). Group 1 (open reduction) had better functional results in terms of occlusion and range of motion after 3 months as compared to the group 2 (closed reduction). P-value 0.19. Conclusion: In dealing with mandibular condyle fractures it was concluded that open reduction and internal fixation is a better technique as compared to the closed reduction with maxillomandibular fixation.