Management of fractures of the nasofrontal complex.

Repair of fractures involving the nasofrontal region remains a mainstay of contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. This article discusses the epidemiology of these injuries, anatomy of the area, and management of these fractures with insight into potential complications. These include fractures of the frontal sinus, naso-orbital-ethmoidal region, root of the nose, and associated adjacent structures.

The presence of mandibular third molars during sagittal split osteotomies does not increase the risk of complications.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate prospectively the effects of the presence or absence of third molars during sagittal split osteotomies (SSOs) on the frequency of unfavorable fractures, degree of entrapment and manipulation of the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN), and procedural time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The investigators designed and implemented a prospective cohort study and enrolled a sample composed of patients who underwent SSOs to correct mandibular deformities. The primary predictor variable was the status of the mandibular third molar at the time of SSO, and it was divided into 2 levels, present at the time of SSO (group I) or absent at the time of SSO (group II). The primary outcome variable was unfavorable splits. The secondary outcome variables were the degree of entrapment/manipulation of the IAN and the procedural time. Appropriate bivariate and multivariate statistics were computed, and the level of statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: Six hundred seventy-seven SSOs were performed in 339 patients: group I consisted of 331 SSOs (mean age ± SD: 19.6 ± 7.4 yrs), and group II consisted of 346 SSOs (30.4 ± 12.1 yrs). The overall rate of unfavorable fractures was 3.1% (21 of 677), with frequencies of 2.4% (8 of 331) in group I, compared with 3.8% (13 of 346) in group II (P = .3). The rate of IAN entrapment in the proximal segment was significantly lower in group I (37.2%) than in group II (46.5%; P = .01). The degree of entrapment was also significantly more severe for group II (P < .001). Third molars increased procedural time by 1.7 minutes (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of third molars during SSOs is not associated with an increased frequency of unfavorable fractures. Concomitant third molar removal in SSOs also decreases proximal segment IAN entrapment but only slightly increases operating time.

Concomitant removal of mandibular third molars during sagittal split osteotomy minimizes neurosensory dysfunction.

PURPOSE: Inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injury is 1 of the most important postoperative complications after sagittal split osteotomy (SSO). The purpose of our study was to investigate the effects of the presence or absence of a mandibular third molar on the neurosensory recovery of the IAN after SSO. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study enrolled a sample composed of patients who underwent SSO to correct mandibular deformities. The primary predictor variable was the status of the mandibular third molar at the time of SSO and it was divided into two levels, present at the time of SSO (Group I) or absent at the time of SSO (Group II). The primary outcome variable was neurosensory recovery of the IAN, assessed using the Medical Research Council scale, functional sensory recovery, and subjective evaluation. Neurosensory status was measured 3 times (preoperatively and 3 and 6 months postoperatively). Appropriate bivariate and multivariate statistics were computed, and the level of statistical significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 120 SSOs were performed in 60 patients. Group I included 64 SSOs (mean patient age ± SD 19.3 ± 8.0 years) and group II, 56 SSOs (mean patient age 24.9 ± 10.0 years). The Medical Research Council scale scores showed that the presence of third molars during SSO was associated with a statistically significant decreased incidence of neurosensory disturbance of the IAN at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (all P < .01). Functional sensory recovery was achieved more frequently in group I, but this difference remained significant only at 3 months after adjusting (P = .01). A "normal sensation" was subjectively reported more frequently in group I at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (P ≤ .05). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of third molars during SSO minimizes postoperative neurosensory disturbance of the IAN.

Bisphosphonate associated osteonecrosis of the jaw.

In 2003, the first reports describing osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in patients receiving bisphosphonates (BP) were published. These cases occurred in patients with cancer receiving high-dose intravenous BP; however, 5% of the cases were in patients with osteoporosis receiving low-dose bisphosphonate therapy. We present the results of a systematic review of the incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of BP associated ONJ. We conducted a comprehensive literature search for relevant studies on BP associated ONJ in oncology and osteoporosis patients published before February 2008.All selected relevant articles were sorted by area of focus. Data for each area were abstracted by 2 independent reviewers. The results showed that the diagnosis is made clinically. Prospective data evaluating the incidence and etiologic factors are very limited. In oncology patients receiving high-dose intravenous BP, ONJ appears to be dependent on the dose and duration of therapy, with an estimated incidence of 1%-12% at 36 months of exposure. In osteoporosis patients, it is rare, with an estimated incidence < 1 case per 100,000 person-years of exposure. The incidence of ONJ in the general population is not known. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to confirm a causal link between low-dose BP use in the osteoporosis patient population and ONJ. We concluded BP associated ONJ is associated with high-dose BP therapy primarily in the oncology patient population. Prevention and treatment strategies are currently based on expert opinion and focus on maintaining good oral hygiene and conservative surgical intervention.

Canadian consensus practice guidelines for bisphosphonate associated osteonecrosis of the jaw.

OBJECTIVE: Following publication of the first reports of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in patients receiving bisphosphonates in 2003, a call for national multidisciplinary guidelines based upon a systematic review of the current evidence was made by the Canadian Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (CAOMS) in association with national and international societies concerned with ONJ. The purpose of the guidelines is to provide recommendations regarding diagnosis, identification of at-risk patients, and prevention and management strategies, based on current evidence and consensus. These guidelines were developed for medical and dental practitioners as well as for oral pathologists and related specialists. METHODS: The multidisciplinary task force established by the CAOMS reviewed all relevant areas of research relating to ONJ associated with bisphosphonate use and completed a systematic review of current literature. These evidence-based guidelines were developed utilizing a structured development methodology. A modified Delphi consensus process enabled consensus among the multidisciplinary task force members. These guidelines have since been reviewed by external experts and endorsed by national and international medical, dental, oral surgery, and oral pathology societies. RESULTS: RECOMMENDATIONS regarding diagnosis, prevention, and management of ONJ were made following analysis of all current data pertaining to this condition. ONJ has many etiologic factors including head and neck irradiation, trauma, periodontal disease, local malignancy, chemotherapy, and glucocorticoid therapy. High-dose intravenous bisphosphonates have been identified as a risk factor for ONJ in the oncology patient population. Low-dose bisphosphonate use in patients with osteoporosis or other metabolic bone disease has not been causally linked to the development of ONJ. Prevention, staging, and treatment recommendations are based upon collective expert opinion and current data, which has been limited to case reports, case series, surveys, retrospective studies, and 2 prospective observational studies. RECOMMENDATIONS: In all oncology patients, a thorough dental examination including radiographs should be completed prior to the initiation of intravenous bisphosphonate therapy. In this population, any invasive dental procedure is ideally completed prior to the initiation of high-dose bisphosphonate therapy. Non-urgent procedures are preferably delayed for 3 to 6 months following interruption of bisphosphonate therapy. Osteoporosis patients receiving oral or intravenous bisphosphonates do not require a dental examination prior to initiating therapy in the presence of appropriate dental care and good oral hygiene. Stopping smoking, limiting alcohol intake, and maintaining good oral hygiene should be emphasized for all patients receiving bisphosphonate therapy. Individuals with established ONJ are most appropriately managed with supportive care including pain control, treatment of secondary infection, removal of necrotic debris, and mobile sequestrate. Aggressive debridement is contraindicated. CONCLUSION: Our multidisciplinary guidelines, which provide a rational evidence-based approach to the diagnosis, prevention, and management of bisphosphonate-associated ONJ in Canada, are based on the best available published data and the opinion of national and international experts involved in the prevention and management of ONJ.

Resterilization of instruments used in a hospital-based oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic.

OBJECTIVE: The transmission of pathogens from one patient to another via contaminated devices has been a high profile issue in infection control. Although single-use devices have been promoted as a preventative strategy, resterilization of instruments has been a common practice in dentistry. The purpose of this study was to investigate the rate of bacterial contamination of instruments resterilized for use in oral and maxillofacial procedures in a hospital-based clinic. METHODS: The experiment was a prospective randomized controlled study. The test group consisted of burs that had been used in surgical procedures. These burs were grossly debrided before being cleaned and gas sterilized in the central sterilizing department of the hospital. The burs were transferred in a sterile fashion into a culture medium selected to grow oral bacteria. The control group comprised new unused instruments treated in an identical fashion before culturing. All burs were incubated and monitored daily for 72 h. RESULTS: The rate of bacterial contamination in the test groups was significantly higher than in the control group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Reuse of instruments can be cost-effective if the safety of patients can be assured; however, there is increasing evidence that the sterilization process may not be completely effective. Consideration should be given to the classification of certain types of dental burs as single-use devices if sterilization cannot be guaranteed.