A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Symptomatic plate removal after treatment of facial fractures
Tekijät: Thoren H, Snall J, Kormi E, Lindqvist C, Suominen-Taipale L, Tornwall J
Kustantaja: CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
Julkaisuvuosi: 2010
Journal: Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
Lehden akronyymi: J CRANIO MAXILL SURG
Vuosikerta: 38
Numero: 7
Aloitussivu: 505
Lopetussivu: 510
Sivujen määrä: 6
ISSN: 1010-5182
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2010.01.005
Tiivistelmä
Aims: To identify the rates and reasons for plate removal (PR) among patients treated for facial fractures. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of files of 238 patients. Results: Forty-eight patients (20.2%) had plates removed. The reason for removal was objective in 33.3% and subjective in 29.2%. The most common subjective reason was cold sensitivity, and the most common objective reason was wound dehiscence/infection. Women had PR for subjective reasons more often than men (p = 0.018). Removal was performed more often for subjective reasons after zygomatico-orbital fractures than after mandibular fractures (p = 0.002). Plates inserted in the mandible from an intraoral approach were removed more frequently than extraorally inserted mandibular plates, intraorally inserted maxillary plates, and extraorally inserted plates in other locations (p < 0.001). Orbital rim plates had a higher risk of being removed than maxillary or frontal bone plates (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Subjective discomfort is a notable reason for PR among Finnish patients, suggesting that the cold climate has an influence on the need for removal. Patients receiving mandibular osteosynthesis with miniplates from an intraoral approach are at risk of hardware removal because of wound dehiscence/infection and loose/broken hardware, reminding us that more rigid fixation devices should not be forgotten despite the widespread use of miniplates. (C) 2010 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
Aims: To identify the rates and reasons for plate removal (PR) among patients treated for facial fractures. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of files of 238 patients. Results: Forty-eight patients (20.2%) had plates removed. The reason for removal was objective in 33.3% and subjective in 29.2%. The most common subjective reason was cold sensitivity, and the most common objective reason was wound dehiscence/infection. Women had PR for subjective reasons more often than men (p = 0.018). Removal was performed more often for subjective reasons after zygomatico-orbital fractures than after mandibular fractures (p = 0.002). Plates inserted in the mandible from an intraoral approach were removed more frequently than extraorally inserted mandibular plates, intraorally inserted maxillary plates, and extraorally inserted plates in other locations (p < 0.001). Orbital rim plates had a higher risk of being removed than maxillary or frontal bone plates (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Subjective discomfort is a notable reason for PR among Finnish patients, suggesting that the cold climate has an influence on the need for removal. Patients receiving mandibular osteosynthesis with miniplates from an intraoral approach are at risk of hardware removal because of wound dehiscence/infection and loose/broken hardware, reminding us that more rigid fixation devices should not be forgotten despite the widespread use of miniplates. (C) 2010 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
Ladattava julkaisu This is an electronic reprint of the original article. |  |
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali