Comparative evaluation of bite force in patients treated for unilateral mandibular condylar fractures by open and closed methods. Issue 3 (26th January 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Patel K. N., A.; Girish, G.; Akarsh, R.; Nikhila, G.; Bhat, Preethi; Shabadi, Nikita
• Is Part Of: Dental traumatology. Volume 38:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 223
• Page End: 228
• Publication Date: 2022-01-26
• Subjects: dental trauma -- prognosis -- treatment; Teeth -- Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Dentistry, Operative -- Periodicals; Traumatology -- Periodicals; Endodontics -- Periodicals; 617.6
• DOI: 10.1111/edt.12733
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1600-4469

Abstract

Abstract: Background/Aim: Condylar fractures account for a large proportion (20% to 52%) of mandibular injuries. The goal of treating these fractures is to restore the occlusion, thereby re‐establishing the masticatory function as close as possible to the patient's pre‐trauma state. The aim of this study was to compare the bite forces following unilateral condylar fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with those managed by the closed method. Method: Patients with unilateral mandibular condylar fractures were divided into two groups ( n = 20) using a simple randomization method. Patients in group I were treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using titanium miniplates and screws. Patients in group II were treated by the closed method with inter‐maxillary fixation. Patients in both groups were evaluated pre‐operatively and then post‐operatively at one week, one month and three months for maximum bite force achieved at the central incisor, premolar and molar regions. Results: Pre‐operative bite forces on the unaffected site were significantly higher than the affected site in both groups, whereas no significant difference was observed in bite forces between the unaffected and affected sites in both groups post‐operatively. The bite forces achieved at both the unaffected and affected sites in the ORIF group were significantly higher than in the closed group. Conclusion: Maximum bite forces differed significantly when the treatment was done with the open method, and the patients treated with the open method needed less time to achieve the maximum bite forces, thereby making an earlier return to function.