Is a deep subfascial approach better than the subfascial apporach to temporo-mandibular joint in terms of facial nerve injury and quality of life?. Issue 8 (August 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rastogi, Sanjay; Sharma, Ashish; Kumari, Nandani; Choudhury, Rupshikha; Tripathi, Siddhi; Kumar, Ankit; Chauhan, Pranshu; Kumar Das, Kaustuv
• Is Part Of: Journal of cranio-maxillofacial surgery. Volume 46:Issue 8(2018)
• Page Start: 1172
• Page End: 1178
• Publication Date: 2018-08
• Subjects: TMJ ankylosis -- Deep subfascial -- Subfascial -- Facial nerve -- Quality of life; Skull -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- surgery -- Periodicals; Skull -- surgery -- Periodicals; Oral Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; Surgery, Oral -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.514
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.04.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1010-5182

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: The objective of the study was to compare the deep subfascial approach to subfascial approach in terms of facial nerve injury and quality of life. Materials and methods: A randomized study was performed from August 2013 to March 2017 on 24 patients with unilateral TMJ ankylosis. The subjects were randomly allotted to either Group I (12, Deep Subfascial) or Group II (12, Subfascial). All patients were evaluated objectively for facial nerve injury post-operatively and subjectively for quality of life in the form of a questionnaire post-operatively for 6 months. The data were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics, mean standard deviation, Wilcoxon paired t test, Friedman's test, and Mann Whitney U test. Results: The comparison of the difference between the groups for postoperative facial nerve function at various time intervals did not give any significant differences (p > 0.05). In terms of quality of life there was a significant difference at 1 month post-operatively (p < 0.05) amidst the two approaches, however, 6-month follow-up revealed that there is no significant difference between the two approaches (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The study reveals that both the approaches are safe in terms of facial nerve injury and quality of life long term.