Page 141 - Open versus closed Mandibular condyle fractures

A paired-samples t-test was used to detect a significant difference between the pre-treatment and post-treatment volumes. The Pearson test was used to assess the correlation of condylar volume and the MAI and MFIQ scores.
Linear regression was used to explore the effects of gender, age, cause of trauma, type of fracture, presence of other fractures, physiotherapy, duration of follow- up, MMO, dental status, self-perceived occlusion, and treatment modality, on the condylar volumes. Backward elimination in stepwise regression was used to create a definitive model. The data were analysed using SPSS version 24 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS
Seventy-four (43.3%) of the 171 patients who were contacted to participate in this cross-sectional study were enrolled. The post-treatment volumes were analysed in 49 patients, 22 of whom had a CT scan on presentation. The post-treatment CBCT scans for 25 patients could not be analysed because of poor quality (e.g., scattering osteosynthesis material).
The cause of trauma was a sports-related injury in 26 cases (53.1%), a fall in 10 (20.4%), a physical assault in 8 (16.3%), and a road traffic accident in 5 (10.2%). Forty-one patients (83.7%) received closed treatment and 8 (16.3%) received open treatment.
Arch bars (9 patients, 21.4%), brackets (14 patients, 33.3%), or intermaxillary fixation screws (2 patients, 4.8%) were used for MMF. All patients in the study were dentate. Twenty-four patients (49%) underwent physiotherapy to improve their MMO, range of movement, and/or occlusion. The mean follow-up duration was 4.8 (range 1 - 8.7) years.
The pre-treatment and post-treatment volumes (Table 1) were normally distributed (pre-treatment: non-fractured P = 0.557; post-treatment: fractured P = 0.196; non- fractured P = 0.380). There were no significant differences in volume between the intracapsular and extracapsular fractured condyles (Table 2).
Cone beam computed tomography analysis
151
4.3