Author:
Huang Chao-Min,Chan Man-Yee,Hsu Jui-Ting,Su Kuo-Chih
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Many types of titanium plates were used to treat subcondylar fracture clinically. However, the efficacy of fixation in different implant positions and lengths of the bone plate has not been thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to use finite element analysis (FEA) to analyze the biomechanical effects of subcondylar fracture fixation with miniplates at different positions and lengths so that clinicians were able to find a better strategy of fixation to improve the efficacy and outcome of treatment.
Methods
The CAD software was used to combine the mandible, miniplate, and screw to create seven different FEA computer models. These models with subcondylar fracture were fixed with miniplates at different positions and of different lengths. The right unilateral molar clench occlusal mode was applied. The observational indicators were the reaction force at the temporomandibular joint, von Mises stress of the mandibular bone, miniplate and screw, and the sliding distance on the oblique surface of the fracture site at the mandibular condyle.
Results
The results showed the efficacy of fixation was better when two miniplates were used comparing to only one miniplates. Moreover, using longer miniplates for fixation had better results than the short one. Furthermore, fixing miniplates at the posterior portion of subcondylar region would have a better fixation efficacy and less sliding distance (5.46–5.76 μm) than fixing at the anterolateral surface of subcondylar region (6.10–7.00 μm).
Conclusion
Miniplate fixation, which was placed closer to the posterior margin, could effectively reduce the amount of sliding distance in the fracture site, thereby achieving greater stability. Furthermore, fixation efficiency was improved when an additional miniplate was placed at the anterior margin. Our study suggested that the placement of miniplates at the posterior surface and the additional plate could effectively improve stability.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference28 articles.
1. Lin F-Y, Wu C-I, Cheng H-T. Mandibular fracture patterns at a medical center in central Taiwan: a 3-year epidemiological review. Medicine. 2017;96:e9333.
2. Simsek S, Simsek B, Abubaker A, Laskin D. A comparative study of mandibular fractures in the United States and Turkey. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36:395–7.
3. Bormann K-H, Wild S, Gellrich N-C, Kokemüller H, Stühmer C, Schmelzeisen R, Schön R. Five-year retrospective study of mandibular fractures in Freiburg, Germany: incidence, etiology, treatment, and complications. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67:1251–5.
4. Hammer B, Schier P, Prein J. Osteosynthesis of condylar neck fractures: a review of 30 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;35:288–91.
5. Asim MA, Ibrahim MW, Javed MU, Zahra R, Qayyum MU. Functional outcomes of open versus closed treatment of unilateral mandibular condylar fractures. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2019;31:67–71.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献