ENTtoday
  • Home
  • COVID-19
  • Practice Focus
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Departments
    • Issue Archive
    • TRIO Best Practices
      • Allergy
      • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
      • Head and Neck
      • Laryngology
      • Otology/Neurotology
      • Pediatric
      • Rhinology
      • Sleep Medicine
    • Career Development
    • Case of the Month
    • Everyday Ethics
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Medical Education
    • Online Exclusives
    • Practice Management
    • Resident Focus
    • Rx: Wellness
    • Special Reports
    • Tech Talk
    • Viewpoint
    • What’s Your O.R. Playlist?
  • Literature Reviews
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Events
    • Featured Events
    • TRIO Meetings
  • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Triological Society
    • Advertising Staff
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise
    • Place an Ad
    • Classifieds
    • Rate Card
  • Search

Is Fixation of Mandible Fractures Urgent?

by Daniel A. Barker, MD, and Stephen S. Park, MD • February 1, 2013

  • Tweet
  • Email
Print-Friendly Version

Trio Best PracticeBackground

Mandible fractures have been studied extensively, but controversy remains over the urgency of repair. There are conflicting reports on this topic with some recommending immediate fixation, or at least within the first 72 hours, whereas others claim that repairs as late as five days post-injury do just as well. There are a number of considerations that influence timing of intervention, such as associated injuries, which can preclude aggressive surgical manipulation. However, there is a transition period when the sense of “urgency” becomes more germane.

You Might Also Like

No related posts.

Explore This Issue
February 2013

Should a closed reduction with mandibular-maxillary fixation (MMF) be promptly performed at the beside of the intensive care unit patient? Alternatively, can they be conveniently seen in the office and scheduled for elective surgery within a week or two? Intuitively, delayed repair can be associated with compromised nutrition, poor hygiene, inflammation, scarring within the fracture, and even contamination. On the other hand, facial swelling can also subside and facilitate exposure. Most importantly, however, is whether or not the final outcomes are impacted in terms of union and occlusion.

Best Practice

Delay in repair can be associated with technical challenges and complications. A more vigilant debridement, reduction, and fixation are all warranted. Delay up to five days after injury has not been shown to compromise outcomes in terms of bony union and occlusion. Substance abuse appears to be associated with a greater rate of infection. Read the full article in The Laryngoscope.

Filed Under: Facial Plastic/Reconstructive, Head and Neck, Practice Focus, TRIO Best Practices Tagged With: mandible fracture, outcomes, surgeryIssue: February 2013

You Might Also Like:

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

The Laryngoscope
Ensure you have all the latest research at your fingertips; Subscribe to The Laryngoscope today!

Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
Open access journal in otolaryngology – head and neck surgery is currently accepting submissions.

Classifieds

View the classified ads »

TRIO Best Practices

View the TRIO Best Practices »

Top Articles for Residents

  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Why More MDs, Medical Residents Are Choosing to Pursue Additional Academic Degrees
  • What Physicians Need to Know about Investing Before Hiring a Financial Advisor
  • Tips to Help You Regain Your Sense of Self
  • Should USMLE Step 1 Change from Numeric Score to Pass/Fail?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Vertigo in the Elderly: What Does It Mean?
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • Neurogenic Cough Is Often a Diagnosis of Exclusion
    • Some Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Resists PPI Treatment
    • Vertigo in the Elderly: What Does It Mean?
    • New Developments in the Management of Eustachian Tube Dysfunction
    • Some Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Resists PPI Treatment
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Eustachian Tuboplasty: A Potential New Option for Chronic Tube Dysfunction and Patulous Disease
    • FDA Approves First Treatment for Eosinophilic Esophagitis
    • Clinical Best Practices: Otolaryngologists Tackle Questions
    • Otolaryngologist Shares Experience with Image Manipulation in Research and How to Prevent It
    • Methodology to Study Care Barriers for Head and Neck Cancer Patients in Low- and Middle-Income Countries Yields Insights
    • Spreader Graft Placement Found Comparable in Functional Outcome in Patients with Nasal Obstruction

Polls

Do you think most image manipulation in studies is done accidentally or on purpose?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

Visit: The Triological Society • The Laryngoscope • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology

Wiley
© 2022 The Triological Society. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN 1559-4939