Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Oral Health Dent Manag. 2014 Mar;13(1):8-13.

Changing strategies in the treatment of maxillofacial fractures at thrace region: open vs closed reduction.

Author information

Department of ORL & HNS, Faculty of Medicine, Dumlupinar University, Kutahya, Turkey, Tel: +90 505 7267375; e-mail:



We aimed to analyze etiological factors in patients with maxillofacial trauma, treatment modalities, complications related to surgical approaches and the changing patterns in over time.


A total of 126 patients diagnosed as maxillofacial fractures between August 1998 and June 2012 were investigated in Corlu State Hospital, Ear Nose Throat and Plastic Surgery Clinics, retrospectively.


Of the patients, 92 male (73.01%) and 34 female (26.98%), the mean age was 26.4 (± 14.88). Traffic accidents as a cause of fracture were detected in 47 (37.3%) cases. The other causes were assaults in 34 (26.98%), sport injuries in 23 (18.25%), fall from high in 12 (9.52%) and work-related accidents in 10 (7.93%) patients, respectively. In patients with maxillofacial fractures, 65 (51.58%) of them were nasal, 37 of them were (29.36%) mandible, 6 of them were (4.26%) maxilla, 8 of them (% 6.34) were isolated zygomatic arch fractures. Multiple fractures were detected only 10 patients (7.93%). As a surgical method, closed reduction in 75 (59.52%), open reduction and internal fixation in 29 (23.01%), inter-maxillary fixation with open reduction and internal fixation in 13 (10.31%) and only inter-maxillary fixation in 9 (7.14%) cases were performed. Complications were detected as 10.31% of patients in postoperatively.


Open and closed reduction techniques are safe and successful methods. While closed reduction of mandibular fractures was used as a surgical method previously, combined approaches are now being applied instead of it.

PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center