Mandibular condylar fractures: a 5-year retrospective analysis comparing open versus closed reduction.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mandibular fractures are common facial fractures, and contemporary management of mandibular condylar fractures is controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients who sustained a mandibular condylar fracture between 2016 and 2020, who were managed by either open or closed techniques. The outcomes of this study were post-operative facial nerve function, occlusion, and maximal mouth opening. METHODS: This study is a retrospective multicentre cohort study which assessed clinical records for 246 patients with mandibular condyle fractures in three hospitals in Perth, Western Australia. The primary outcome measure was changes in post-operative facial nerve function. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-two patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and 114 patients had closed management. The overall rate of temporary facial nerve injury following ORIF was 3.28%. The overall rate of permanent facial nerve injury was 0.82%. Sialocoele occurred in 2.46% of all patients who underwent ORIF. 6.14% of patients had persisting malocclusion across both groups. There was a statistically significant association between the degree of fragment shortening and facial nerve injury (P = 0.0063), with more facial nerve changes in the group with 5 mm or greater of fragment shortening. CONCLUSIONS: There is still significant debate over the management of mandibular condylar injuries. This study demonstrates a similar rate of temporary and permanent facial nerve injury as previously described, as well as a similar rate of sialocoele occurrence. Further prospective studies may provide clarity about important characteristics that will help guide decision making for mandibular condylar fractures.