Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Index Copernicus (ICV 2020) – 128.41
MEiN – 70 pts
CiteScore (2021) – 2.0
JCI – 0.5
Average rejection rate (2021) – 81.35%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – quarterly

Download PDF

Dental and Medical Problems

2017, vol. 54, nr 4, October-December, p. 353–359

doi: 10.17219/dmp/80748

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 Open Access

The influence of the condylar fracture treatment method on mandible dynamics

Wpływ metod leczenia złamania kłykciowego na dynamikę ruchów żuchwy

Jakub Krzemień1,A,B,C,D, Łukasz Bańczyk1,A,B,C, Stefan Baron2,E,F, Iwona Niedzielska1,D,E,F

1 Department of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland

2 Department of Temporomandibular Disorders and Orthodontics, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland


Background. Among commonly adopted condylar fracture treatment methods, there is the open reduction and closed reduction method. For the purpose of evaluating the therapeutic effect of a given method and the functional state of the temporomandibular joints, it is possible nowadays to conduct an instrumental analysis with the use of modern devices such as the axiograph.
Objectives. The study was aimed at a long-term assessment of the function of the stomatognathic system, in particular assessment of the range of the condylar path in the temporomandibular joints, depending on the method of condylar fracture treatment (open or closed).
Material and Methods. The study involved 60 patients in total (mean age in the study group was 33.3 years), including 24 women (40%), who were divided into 2 groups. The 1st group included 40 patients in whom condylar fractures were surgically managed. The other group consisted of 20 patients in whom the closed reduction method of treatment was applied. Patients were qualified for surgery under general anesthesia or for treatment by means of standard splints and maxillomandibular fixation. After 6 months following the conclusion of treatment, each patient was scheduled for a follow-up appointment, during which an axiographic examination aimed at the registration of the condylar path in the temporomandibular joints was performed. The values registered were subject to a statistical analysis and compared between the groups.
Results. A significant difference (F = 5.36; p = 0.0241) in the length of the condylar path in the sagittal plane was observed, depending on the method of condylar fracture treatment. In the case of open reduction, the values were higher than in the case of closed reduction.
Conclusion. Miniplate osteosynthesis disturbs the mandibular dynamic pattern to a lesser degree but the technique should constantly be improved in order to limit the traumatization of sensitive periarticular structures.

Key words

axiography, temporomandibular joint, mandibular condyle fracture

Słowa kluczowe

aksjografia, staw skroniowo-żuchwowy, złamanie wyrostka kłykciowego żuchwy

References (25)

  1. Lindahl L. Condylar fractures of the mandible. Int J Oral Surg. 1977;6:12–21.
  2. Andersson L, Kahnberg KE, Pogrel MA, eds. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
  3. Sharif MO. Interventions for the treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;14:4.
  4. Silvennoinen U, Iizuka T, Lindqvist C, Oikarinen K. Different patterns of condylar fractures: An analysis of 382 patients in a 3-year period. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;50:1032–1037.
  5. Abdel-Galil K, Loukota R. Fractures of the mandibular condyle: Evidence base and current concepts of management. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;48:520–526.
  6. Zachariades N. Fractures of the mandibular condyle: A review of 466 cases. Literature review, reflections on treatment and proposals. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2006;34:421–432.
  7. Vesnaver A, Ahčan U, Rozman J. Evaluation of surgical treatment in mandibular condyle fractures. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012;40;522–529.
  8. Chen CT, Feng CH, Tsay PK, Lai JP, Chen YR. Functional outcomes following surgical treatment of bilateral mandibular condylar fractures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;40:38–44.
  9. Belli E, Matteini C, Incisivo V. Orthodontic-surgical treatment after posttraumatic bilateral condylectomy of the mandible in an adult patient. J Craniofac Surg. 2003;14:55–62.
  10. Slavicek R. The Masticatory Organ. Klosterneuburg: Gamma Medizinisch-wissenschaftliche Fortbildungs AG; 2002.
  11. Gsellmann B, Schmid-Schwap M, Piehslinger E, Slavicek R. Lengths of condylar pathways measured with computerized axiography (CADIAX®) and occlusal index in patients and volunteers. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25:146–152.
  12. Bernhardt O, Küppers N, Rosin M, Meyer G. Comparative tests of arbitrary and kinematic transverse horizontal axis recordings of mandibular movements. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89:175–179.
  13. Krzemień J, Baron S. Axiographic and clinical assessment of temporomandibular joint function in patients with partial edentulism. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2013;15:19–26.
  14. Thieme KM, Kubein-Meesenburg D, Ihlow D, Nagerl H. Is a “movable hinge axis” used by the human stomatognathic system? Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2006;8:13–25.
  15. Schneider M, Lauer G, Eckelt U. Surgical treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle: A comparison of long-term results following different approaches – functional, axiographical, and radiologi­cal findings. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2007;35:151–160.
  16. Han BJ, Kang H, Liu LK, Yi XZ, Li XQ. Comparisons of condylar movements with the functional occlusal clutch and tray clutch recording methods in CADIAX system. Int J Oral Sci. 2010;2:208–214.
  17. Chrcanovic BR. Open versus closed reduction: Diacapitular fractures of the mandibular condyle. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;16:257–265.
  18. Zhao YM, Yang J, Bai RC, Ge LH, Zhang Y. A retrospective study of using removable occlusal splint in the treatment of condylar fracture in children. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42:1078–1082.
  19. He D, Yang C, Chen M, Bin J, Zhang X, Qiu Y. Modified preauricular approach and rigid internal fixation for intracapsular condyle fracture of the mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68:1578–1584.
  20. Throckmorton GS, Ellis E. Recovery of mandibular motion after closed and open treatment of unilateral mandibular condylar process fractures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;29:421–427.
  21. Sforza C, Tartaglia GM, Lovecchio N, et al. Mandibular movements at maximum mouth opening and EMG activity of masticatory and neck muscles in patients rehabilitated after a mandibular condyle fracture. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37:327–333.
  22. Kyzas PA, Saeed A, Tabbenor O. The treatment of mandibular condyle fractures: A meta-analysis. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012;40:438–452.
  23. Handschel J, Rüggeberg T, Depprich R, et al. Comparison of various approaches for the treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar process. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012;40:397–401.
  24. Shen L, Li P, Li J, Long J, Tian W, Tang W. Management of superolate­ral dislocation of the mandibular condyle: A retrospective study of 10 cases. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014;42:53–58.
  25. Hochban W, Ellers M, Umstadt HE, Juchems KI. Surgical reposition and fixation of mandibular condyle fractures via intraoral approach. Fortschr Kiefer Gesichtschir. 1996;41:80–85 [in German].