ORIGINAL ARTICLE. Facial Fracture Classification According to Skeletal Support Mechanisms
|
|
- Toby Stevens
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Facial Fracture Classification According to Skeletal Support Mechanisms Terry L. Donat, MD; Carmen Endress, MD; Robert H. Mathog, MD Objective: To construct, propose, and evaluate the usefulness of a new clinical facial fracture classification scheme to accurately denote, communicate, and compare facial fractures. Design: A retrospective, consecutive sample study with application of the proposed classification scheme to denote maxillary and zygomatic fractures with computed tomography. Setting: Metropolitan tertiary care trauma center. Patients: A total of 213 consecutive adult patients with facial fractures evaluated by means of 2-dimensional computed tomography. Results: The classification scheme is defined according to fractures of vertical buttresses and horizontal beams. The scheme uses 3 primary descriptors of laterality and support sites to denote the clinical pattern of the fractures. This scheme was accurately applied and sufficient to describe 87 midfacial fracture patterns in this study. In addition, 118 (98%) of 120 mock fracture patterns were correctly transcribed and reproducibly communicated among 12 participating physicians. Conclusions: This newly proposed facial fracture classification scheme provides a convenient, specific, descriptive, and reproducible method of denoting fracture patterns. This scheme may be used to accurately communicate and compare, in greater detail than permitted using current independent classification schemes, the essential site and degree-of-severity characteristics of facial fractures critical to their surgical reduction and reconstruction. The usefulness of this classification scheme in determining optimal methods and subsequent outcomes in midfacial fracture reduction requires further investigation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1998;124: From the Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, University of Minnesota Health Sciences Center, Minneapolis (Dr Donat), and Departments of Radiology (Dr Endress) and Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery (Dr Mathog), Wayne State University, Detroit, Mich. Dr Donat is now with the Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery at Wayne State University. THE INCIDENCE, mechanisms, and pathophysiology of facial fractures are well described in the literature, as are the current approaches to fracture reduction and fixation. 1-5 The 3 goals of therapy in treating midfacial fractures are (1) to restore functional occlusion; (2) to stabilize the major facial skeletal supports, thereby restoring the premorbid 3-dimensional contour (height, width, and projection) to the face; and (3) to provide skeletal support for the proper function and appearance of the overlying facial soft tissue structures. The current approach to facial fracture repair requires the repositioning of the fracture segments into anatomic position, with a focus on the lattice supports in relation to each other and to the cranial base Modern therapy also mandates the rigid stabilization of the vertical and horizontal facial supports to withstand the forces of mastication Such treatment plans are made possible by the diagnostic capability of computed tomographic (CT) scanning technology, a major advance over plain x-rays, for fracture identification and fragment visualization Despite the widespread acceptance of current diagnostic and treatment methods, the most commonly used classification for describing facial fractures remains that classically described by French physician Rene LeFort, which alone yields insufficient information for fracture description and the complete planning of treatment. LeFort s original classification described the great lines of weakness according to fracture patterns he experimentally produced. 1 The LeFort classification is inadequate in that it does not define the facial skeletal supports or the more severely comminuted, incomplete, or combination maxillary This article is also available on our Web site:
2 METHODS ANATOMIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR CLASSIFICATION The scheme for the midfacial fracture classification system in this study was designed by partitioning the 3 pairs of horizontal structural supports (beams) and 3 pairs of vertical structural supports (buttresses). Based on the intersection of these supports and segmental divisions, there were 11 unilateral sites and 22 bilateral sites (Figure 1 and Table 1). The 3 primary, paired horizontal beams from superior to inferior were the superior orbital rims combined with the glabella (H1), the inferior orbital rims combined with the es (H2), and the alveolar processes of the maxilla (H3). The primary, paired vertical buttresses from anterior to posterior were the nasal maxillary (V1), the zygomaticomaxillary (V2), and the pterygomaxillary (V3) buttresses. The beams were further categorized into central (c) and lateral (l) segments, and the buttresses were categorized into superior (s) and inferior (i) segments. Nasal fractures, thin lamina fractures (such as found along the orbital walls and the walls of the maxilla), and the degree of fracture displacement were not included as part of the classification system. The classic completed LeFort and zygomatic fracture patterns as herein represented according to buttress and beam support involvement are listed in Table 2. Individual fracture locations were denoted laterally (left or right), by involvement of the fractured buttress or beam (vertical or horizontal), and at the site of the fracture line along the buttress, superior or inferior, or along the beam, central or lateral. The fractures of patients were denoted by listing in sequence the location of individual fractures. Examples shown in Figure 2 through Figure 5 demonstrate the methods. EVALUATION The classification system was evaluated retrospectively by reviewing medical records of 213 adult patients with midfacial fractures treated at Detroit Receiving Hospital, Detroit, Mich, from January 1, 1993, through June 30, All patients were evaluated by axial and coronal CT scan imaging. The patients ranged in age from 18 to 70 years with the primary mechanisms of injury being blunt trauma caused by altercation or motor vehicle accident in 208 patients (97.6%) or penetrating trauma caused by gunshot wounds in 5 patients (2.4%). Twenty-six patients were women and 187 were men. To determine whether the fractures could be analyzed and assigned to a specific notation, the CT scans were evaluated for fracture sites and these sites were then diagrammed and transcribed according to the classification system. Evaluations were blinded to any prior medical records or radiology interpretation. Designations were then related to a standard method of description to show the advantages and disadvantages of the system. To test whether the notations could serve as an efficient and valid means of communication, 12 resident physicians were presented with a series of mock facial fracture diagrams and fracture designations. Each physician was presented first with 5 distinct fracture patterns diagrammed according to the classification scheme and asked to provide notations of the fracture patterns; they were subsequently presented with 5 new distinct notations of fractures and asked to diagram the fracture pattern represented by the notation. The number of the correctly transcribed fracture diagrams and notations was determined. Transcription errors were also determined. fractures. Moreover, it does not describe the fractures of the part bearing the occlusal segment. 4 The LeFort classification thus often underestimates the complexity of the fractures and limits the complete description of the overall facial fracture pattern, which often includes any array of fronto-orbital, zygomatic, and nasoethmoidal fractures in combination with maxillary injury. The goals of a classification system oriented toward current therapy for midfacial fractures should ideally include information obtained from the clinical, surgical, and CT radiological examinations (1) to accurately represent the anatomic and functional magnitude and complexity of the overall midfacial fracture pattern, (2) to describe the involved functional skeletal supports critical to the proper design for surgical therapy, (3) to provide a meaningful common terminology for communication of the fracture information between the radiologist and surgeon, and (4) to provide specific information sufficient for comparison of treatment outcomes of midfacial fracture treatments. RESULTS Among the 213 patients, 43 cases involved fractures of the bony lamina of the orbital walls (blowout type) or nasal bones alone and were not included for analysis. The remaining 170 cases were classified and are listed in Table 3. Cases were described according to whether the injury was unilateral left (L), unilateral right (R), or bilateral, and were compared with prior nomenclature systems, where applicable. The classification scheme was easily applied to all of the fracture patterns determined by axial and coronal CT scan for the patients in this study. No fracture patterns in this study were deemed unassignable, as might occur due to a fracture line passing through a buttress/ beam intersection. Using the proposed classification, 40 differing unilateral fracture patterns were identified among 122 patients who presented with unilateral facial fractures. Forty-seven differing fracture patterns were identified among the 48 patients presenting with bilateral facial fractures. Therefore, using the proposed classification, 87 specific and distinct fracture patterns were described among the 170 patient CT scan studies. Only 25 (28.7%) fracture patterns reviewed met the defined criteria of LeFort fractures in which they had all of the fractures required for 1 of the classic LeFort fracture patterns. Among these, only 11 could be identified as bilateral LeFort fractures of the same level, although often with considerable variation in complex- 1307
3 Table 2. Facial Beam and Buttress Involvement in Classically Defined* Complete Maxillary and Zygomatic Fractures Right H1 Midline H1c V1s Left V2s Fracture Pattern LeFort I* (Guerin) LeFort Il* LeFort IlI* Zygomatic (tripod) Proposed Designation L V1i, V2i, V3 R V1i, V2i, V3 L V1s, V2i, V3, H2 R V1s, V2i, V3, H2 L V1s, V2s, V3, H2l R V1s, V2s, V3, H2l V2s, V2i, H2, H2l H2l H2 H3 H3c V1i V3 V2i *The classic fracture descriptions by LeFort and Guerin 1 mandated the bilateral involvement of the pterygoid plates for a complete fracture. Fractures without bilateral involvement of the pterygoid plates or other defined lines of weakness were classically described by LeFort as incomplete, unilaterally outlined, or unilaterally indicated. L indicates left; R, right. See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of the abbreviations. Figure 1. Designations of fractures according to horizontal beams and vertical buttresses. Beams: superior orbital rims and glabella, H1; inferior orbital rims and es, H2; alveolar process of maxilla, H3; c indicates central; l, lateral. Buttresses: frontonasomaxillary, V1; frontozygomaticomaxillary, V2; pterygomaxillary, V3; s indicates superior; i, inferior. Reprinted with permission from illustrator William Loechel. Right H1 Midline H1c V1s Left V2s H2l H2 Table 1. Designation of Buttress and Beam Segments V1i V3 V2i Abbreviation Description Buttress V1 superior V1s Nasofrontal buttress (glabella to nasomaxillary suture) V1 inferior V1i Nasomaxillary buttress (nasomaxillary suture to alveolus) V2 superior V2s Zygomaticofrontal buttress (malar eminence to frontal bone) V2 inferior V2i Zygomaticomaxillary buttress (malar eminence to alveolus) V3 V3 Pterygomaxillary buttress Beam H1 H1 Supraorbital rims H1 central H1c Intraorbital frontal bone (glabellar frontal bone) H2 H2 Infraorbital rim (malar eminence to nasomaxillary suture) H2 lateral H2l Zygomatic arch H3 H3 Maxillary alveolus H3 central H3c Premaxillary alveolus ity between sides. Most illustrative of the complexity of the fractures in this series is that current classifications, if applicable at all, do not describe the multitude of distinct fracture patterns, as have herein been identified by the involved facial supports. The specific information critical to the modern approach and method of treatment is therefore seen to be deficient in currently used classifications of midfacial fracture patterns. H3 H3c Figure 2. Designations of fractures in case 1. Left: V1i, V2i, H2; right: V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2 l. See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of the abbreviations. Reprinted with permission from illustrator William Loechel. The mock facial fracture patterns presented to the 10 participating physicians for transcription are listed in Table 4, with the first 5 having been transcribed from a classification diagram to the fracture pattern notation and the subsequent 5 having been transcribed from the pattern notation to a classification diagram. Of the 120 total patterns posed for evaluation, only 2 were miscommunicated, each by different physicians. The 2 errors that occurred were an incorrectly diagrammed template for laterality (right and left interposed, mock facial fracture pattern 5) in 1 pattern and an incorrectly diagrammed buttress designation (V1i and V2i interposed, mock facial fracture pattern 9) in 1308
4 A B C D E F Figure 3. Case 1. Computed tomographic (CT) scans of a 28-year-old man who received multiple manual facial assault impacts. A, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1i, H2, and right V2i. B, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1i, H2, V2i, and right V1i, V2s, V2i, H2. C, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1i, H2, V2i, and right V1i, V2s, V2i, H2. D, Axial CT scan displaying fracture left V2s. E, Axial CT scan displaying fracture H2 l. F, Coronal CT scan displaying intact V3. See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of the abbreviations. COMMENT H2l H1 Right H2 H3 Midline H1c H3c Figure 4. Designation of fractures in case 2. Left: V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1c, H2, H2 l, H3c; right: V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1, H1c, H2, H2 l. See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of the abbreviations. Reprinted with permission from illustrator William Loechel. the other pattern. No errors occurred in providing the mock fracture pattern notation from the mock fracture classification diagrams. V1s V1i Left V3 V2i V2s Recent technological advances in radiologic imaging have been beneficial in the overall approach to the diagnosis and treatment of facial fractures. The widespread advent of CT scanning in the United States in the past decade markedly improved the accuracy of fracture imaging to greater than 95%, subsequently enabling the treating surgeon to better determine the requirements for surgery and a plan for approaches and methods of repair In addition, the recent advances in both the areas of internal rigid fixation and the use of autogenous bone grafts for reconstruction have yielded an improved early treatment of fractures with the reestablishment of anatomic form and function before the onset of the sequelae previously seen with external fixation techniques, poor fracture exposure, and stabilization, or a delay in fracture treatment. 7,16 It is in accordance with these diagnostic and treatment advances that the need for a classification system providing a means for the informative description and communication of facial fractures characteristics, especially between the radiologist and surgeon, has become obvious. The LeFort classification system, albeit quite simple and used for many years, does not amply describe multiple sites of fracture now seen with modern imaging techniques. In an attempt to improve interpretations of these images and applications of treatment, Manson et al 6 described a method that looked at displacement and forces to create the fracture and noted the contribution of supporting vertical buttresses of the face especially for application and understanding of the role for internal fixation. Approach algorithms were 1309
5 A B C D E F G Figure 5. Case 2. Computed tomographic (CT) scans of a 23-year-old male driver who received a high-velocity facial impact from an automobile tire jettisoned from a truck traveling ahead of the patient s vehicle. A, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left H1c and right H1, H1c. B, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1s, H1c, and right V1s, H1c. C, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1s, V2s, H2, and right V1s, V2s, H2. D, Coronal CT scan displaying fractures left V1i, V2i, V3, H2 l, H3c, and right V1i, V2i, H2 l. E, Axial CT scan displaying fractures left V1i, V2i, H2 l, and right V1i, V2i, H2 l. F, Axial CT scan additionally displaying fractures left V3 and right V3. G, Axial CT scan displaying fractures left V1s, V2s, and right V1s, V2s. See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of the abbreviations. offered by Gruss et al, 7,8 using central and lateral midfacial fracture descriptions, as well as Gruss et al stressing the importance of the in guiding the reestablishment of facial skeletal contours. Other classifications were described to supplement the LeFort description and were based on detailed descriptions of fractures of individual midfacial regions, such as orbitozygomatic fractures classified by Zingg et al, 12 and the nasoethmoid classification by Leipzinger and Manson. 13 Our system emphasizes the need to analyze the integrity of the vertical and horizontal supports and the need to focus on these supports for reduction and possible rigid fixation. It is assumed that proper reduction of the fractured beams and buttresses will lead to accurate width, length, and projection of the facial skeleton with a concomitant correction of appearance and function. Finer details of reconstruction can be maintained by analyzing and correcting for bone displacement, orbital wall and floor involvement, and comminution. Using the present scheme, the theoretical numbers of unilateral unique fracture pattern combinations can be determined by the combinations (C)[11, n = 1, 2, 3...1] = Other modifiers such as the presence or absence of fractures of the nasal bones, fractures of orbital lamina, and fractures with displacement and/or comminution can be added to provide a comprehensive description of the injury. These concepts thereby allow for an increased specificity of information in describing the variations in fracture patterns that may occur in patients with midfacial fractures that is not currently possible using other classification schemes. The advantage of the classification system is that it provides a method to determine the type of injury and degree of severity based on the site and numbers of buttresses and beams involved with the trauma. Attention can then be focused toward a more direct approach that is necessary to deal with these problems. The system also is an easy means of communication between diagnosticians and surgeons who work on these types of cases. The disadvantages of the classification system is that it is not all-inclusive, negates soft tissue considerations, and does not describe the status of nasal bones, the orbital lamina, or, necessarily, the displacement and comminution of fractures. Such modifers would add 1310
6 Table 3. Patient Fracture Pattern Classification Schemes Proposed Classification* Anatomic Sites Current Classification Unilateral Midfacial Fracture Patterns V1s Medial orbit 2 V1i Medial maxilla 1 V2s Lateral orbit Zingg type A2 1 V2i Lateral maxilla 3 H1 Superior orbit 3 H1c Frontal glabella 2 H2 Inferior orbit Zingg type A3 6 H2l Zygomatic arch Zingg type A1 5 V1s, H2 Medial/inferior orbit 2 V1i, H2 Inferior orbit, medial maxilla 2 V2s, V2i Lateral orbit, lateral maxilla 3 V2s, H2 Lateral/inferior orbit 3 V2i, H2l Lateral maxilla, 3 V2s, H2l Lateral orbit, 1 H2, H2l Inferior orbit, 1 H1, H1c Superior orbit and glabella 1 V1s, V1i, H2 Medial/inferior orbit, medial maxilla 3 V1s, V2s, V2i Medial/lateral orbit, lateral maxilla 1 V1i, V2i, H2 Medial/lateral maxilla, inferior orbit 1 V2s, V2i, H2 Inferior/lateral orbit, lateral maxilla 4 V2s, V2i, H2l Lateral orbit, lateral maxilla, 5 V2s, H2, H2l Inferior/lateral orbit, 1 V2i, H2, H2l Inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, 3 V1i, V2s, V2i, H2 Inferior/lateral orbit, medial/lateral maxilla 2 V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Inferior/lateral orbit, lateral maxilla, Zingg type B 29 V2i, V3, H2, H2l Lateral maxilla, pterygoid plate, 3 V1s, V1i, V2s, H1, H2 Medial/lateral/superior/inferior orbit, medial maxilla 1 V1s, V1i, V2i, H2, H2l Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 V1s, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, 2 V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 8 V1s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Medial/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, pterygoid, 1 V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, pterygoid, 1 V2s, V2i, H1, H2, H2l Superior/lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, 2 V2s, V2i, H2, H2l, H3 Lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, alveolus, 3 V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) 1 V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial maxilla, 7 V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H3 Medial/lateral orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, alveolus 1 V1i, V2s, V2i, H1, H2, H2l Superior/inferior/lateral orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l 1 V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l, H3 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla/alveolus, 1 Bilateral Midfacial Fracture Patterns LH2l Zygomatic arch Zingg type A1 RH2l Zygomatic arch Zingg type A1 1 L V2i Medial maxilla RH2l Zygomatic arch Zingg type A1 1 L H2 Inferior orbit Zingg type A3 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla L V1i, V2i Medial/lateral maxilla L V1s, V1i, V2s, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial maxilla R V1s, V1i, V2s, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial maxilla 1 L V2s, V2i, H2 Lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla R V2s, H1 Superior/lateral orbit 1 L V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, Zingg type B R V2s Lateral orbit Zingg type A2 1 No. of Patients (Continued) 1311
7 Table 3. Patient Fracture Pattern Classification Schemes (cont) Proposed Classification* Anatomic Sites Current Classification LH2l Zygomatic arch Zingg type A2 R V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, Zingg type B 1 L V1i, V2s, V2i, H2 Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla R V2i, H2, H2l Inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, 2 L H2 Inferior orbit Zingg type A3 R V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1i, V2i, H2 Inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla R V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 L V1i, V2i Medial/lateral maxilla R V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 L V1s Medial maxilla R V1s, V2s, H1c Lateral orbit, medial maxilla, glabella 1 L V1s, H1, H1c Superior/medial orbit, glabella R V1s, H1, H1c Superior/medial orbit, glabella 1 L H1c Glabella R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H1, H1c, H2, H2l Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 L V1s, H1c Medial orbit, glabella R V1s, V1i, V2i, H1c, H2 Medial/inferior orbit, medial maxilla, glabella 1 L H1c Glabella R V1s, V2s, V2i, H1c, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbital rim, glabella, lateral maxilla, 1 L H1, H1c, H2l Superior orbit, glabella, R V1s, V2s, V2i, H1, H1c, H2 Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbital rim, glabella, lateral maxilla 1 L H2 Inferior orbit Zingg type A3 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla L V1i, V2i Medial/lateral maxilla L V1i, V2i, H2 Inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla R V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, R V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2l Lateral orbital rim, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1i, V2i, V3 Medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort I (unilateral) R V1i, V2i, V3, H3c Medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, prealveolus LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1i, V2i, V3, H2l Medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, LeFort I (unilateral) R V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H3, H3c Medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, inferior orbit, alveolus/prealveolus LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1s, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, R V1s, V2i, H2 Medial/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) R V1s, V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, LeFort II (unilateral) 1 L V2s, V2i, V3, H1, H1c, H2 Superior/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, lateral maxilla, pterygoid R V2i, V3 Lateral maxilla, pterygoid 1 L V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2 Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort I (unilateral) R V1s, V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l, H3 Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, alveolus, pterygoid, zygomatic LeFort II (unilateral) 1 arch L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H3, H3c LeFort II (unilateral) alveolus/premaxilla R V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l, H3, H3c Inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, alveolus/prealveolus LeFort II (unilateral) 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1c, H2 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) R V1s, V1i, V2i, H2 Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, R V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l Lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, 1 No. of Patients 1312
8 Table 3. Patient Fracture Pattern Classification Schemes (cont) Proposed Classification* Anatomic Sites Current Classification R V1s, V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2l Medial/lateral orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l, H3c 1 L V1s, V1i, 2s, V2i, V3, H1c, H2, H2l, H3c R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1, H1c, H2, H2l R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l, H3 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, prealveolus, pterygoid, Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, glabella, pterygoid, prealveolus, Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, alveolus, No. of Patients 1 1 R V1s, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, pterygoid, 1, H3 alveolus, R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H2, H2l, H3 Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla,, alveolus 1 L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1c, H2, H2l, H3, H3c R V1s, V1i, V3, H1c, H2, H3, H3c Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid,, alveolus/prealveolus Medial/inferior orbit, medial maxilla, pterygoid, glabella, alveolus/prealveolus L V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H1c, H2, H2l, H3c Medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla, zygomatic arch, prealveolus R V1s, V2i, V3, H1c, H2, H3, H3c Medial/inferior orbit, glabella, medial maxilla, pterygoid, LeFort II (unilateral) 1 alveolus/prealveolus R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l 1 R V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, pterygoid, LeFort I (unilateral) 1 L V1s, V2s, V2i, V3, H1, H2, H2l Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbit, lateral maxilla, pterygoid, R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, H1, H1c, H2, H2l, H3 Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbit, glabella, medial/lateral maxilla,, alveolus 1 L V1s, V1i, V2i, V3, H1c, H2 Medial/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, glabella, pterygoid LeFort II (unilateral) R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H1, H1c, H2, H2l Superior/medial/lateral/inferior orbit, medial/lateral maxilla, glabella, 1 pterygoid, R V1s, V1i, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l, H3, H3c alveolus/ prealveolus, 1 *See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of abbreviations. L indicates left; R, right. Empty cells indicate that no current classification exists for the correlating Proposed Classification and Anatomic Sites descriptions. 1 more information, but at the same time further add to the complexity of the system. The classification system also affords a method of quantitation as shown by the mock exercises in which information was communicated from one surgeon to another. The methods were easily learned and found to be extremely accurate in defining the beam and buttress fracture patterns. The system provided an opportunity to quantitate a variety of patterns and with such methods there should be potential application to the analysis treatment outcomes and series in which patients are provided different treatment modalities. The system thus allows for a comparison of number and location of sites of injury as to their treatment and results. Further investigations, however, will be necessary to evaluate the usefulness of this aspect of the classification system. 1313
9 Table 4. Mock Fracture Diagrams and Summaries* Mock No. Fracture Pattern Notation Schematic Diagram to Written Designation Transcription (n = 60) 1 L V1i, V2i, V3i R V1i, V2i, V3i 2 L V2s, V2i, H2, H2l R V1s, H2 3 L V1s, V2i, V3, H2, H3c R V1i, V2i, V3, H2 4 L V1s, H1, H1c R V1s, V1i, H1c, H2 5 L H2l,H3 R V1s, V1i, V2i, V3, H2, H2l Written Designation to Schematic Diagram Transcription (n = 60) 6 L V1s, V2s, H1, H1c R V1s, H1, H1c 7 L V1s, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l R V1s, V2s, V2i, V3, H2, H2l 8 L V1i, V2i, V3 R V1i, V2i 9 L V1i, H3, H3c R V2s, V2i, H2, H2l 10 L V2s, H1, H2l *See legend to Figure 1 and Table 1 for an explanation of abbreviations. L indicates left; R, right. CONCLUSIONS The proposed classification system is conceptually in anatomic and descriptive accord with the currently practiced methods of facial fracture reduction and rigid fixation. This newly proposed facial fracture classification scheme provides a convenient, succinct, descriptive, and reproducible method of designating beam and buttress fracture patterns. This scheme may be used to accurately communicate and compare, in greater detail than permitted using the LeFort or other independent classification schemes, the essential site and degree-ofseverity characteristics of facial fractures critical to their surgical reduction and reconstruction. The usefulness of this classification scheme in determining optimal methods of treatment and subsequent outcomes in dealing with midfacial fracture requires further investigation. Accepted for publication March 24, Corresponding author: Terry L. Donat, MD, Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Wayne State University, W 12 Mile Road, Novi, MI REFERENCES 1. LeFort R. Etude Experimental sur les fractures de la machoire superieure. Rev Chir Paris. 1901;23: [Tessier P, trans. Experimental study of fractures of the upper jaw. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1972;50: , ]. 2. Rowe NC, Killey H. Fractures of the Facial Skeleton. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1955: Rudderman RH, Mullen RL. Biomechanics of the facial skeleton. Clin Plast Surg. 1992;19(1): Manson PN. Some thoughts on classification and treatment of LeFort fractures. Ann Plast Surg. 1986;17: Markowitz BL, Manson PN. Panfacial fractures: organization of treatment. Clin Plast Surg. 1989;16(1): Manson PN, Hoopes JE, Su CT. Structural pillars of the facial skeleton: an approach to the management of LeFort fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1980;66: Gruss JS, MacKinnon SE. Complex maxillary fractures: the role of buttress fixation and immediate bone grafting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1986;78: Gruss JS, Van Wyck L, Phillips JH, et al. The importance of the in complex midfacial fracture repair and posttraumatic orbitozygomatic deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;85: Stanley RB. Reconstruction of the midfacial vertical dimension following LeFort fractures. Arch Otolaryngol. 1984;110: Gruss JS. Nasoethmoid orbital fractures: classfication and role of primary bone grafting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;75: Stanley RB. Buttress fixation with plates. Operative Techniques Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1995;6: Zingg M, Leadrach K, Chen J, et al. Classification and treatment of zygomatic fractures: a review of 1025 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;50: Leipzinger LS, Manson PN. Nasoethmoid orbital fractures: current concepts and management principles. Clin Plast Surg. 1992;19(1): Manson PN, Shack RP, Leonard LG. Sagittal fractures of the maxilla and palate. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1983;72: Marciani RD. Management of midfacial fractures: fifty years later. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1993;51: Gruss JS, Bubak PJ, Egbert MA. Craniofacial fractures: an algorithm to optimize results. Clin Plast Surg. 1992;19(1): Gentry LR, Manor WF, Turski, PA, et al. High resolution CT analysis of facial struts in trauma, II: osseous and soft tissue complications. Am J Radiol. 1983;140: Marsh JL, Vannier MW, Gado M, Stevens WG. In vivo delineation of facial fractures: the application of advanced medical imaging technology. Ann Plast Surg. 1986;17: Manson PN, Markowitz B, Mirvis S, et al. Toward CT-based facial fracture treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;85: Laine FJ, Conway WF, Laskin DM. Radiology of maxillofacial trauma. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 1993;22: Luce EA. Developing concepts and treatment of complex maxillary fractures. Clin Plast Surg. 1992;19(1):
A New Classification of Zygomatic Fracture Featuring Zygomaticofrontal Suture: Injury Mechanism and a Guide to Treatment
IBIMA Publishing Plastic Surgery: An International Journal http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/psij/psij.html Vol. 2013 (2013), Article ID 383486, 6 pages DOI: 10.5171/2013.383486 Research Article
More informationCT of Maxillofacial Injuries
CT of Maxillofacial Injuries Stuart E. Mirvis, M.D., FACR Department of Radiology University of Maryland School of Medicine Viking 1 1976 MGS 2001 Technology changes the diagnosis Technologic Evolution
More informationImaging Orbit/Periorbital Injury
Imaging Orbit/Periorbital Injury 9 th Nordic Trauma Radiology Course 2016 Stuart E. Mirvis, M.D., FACR Department of Radiology University of Maryland School of Medicine Fireworks Topics to Cover Struts
More informationMaxillary and Periorbital Fractures January 2004
TITLE: Maxillary and Periorbital Fractures SOURCE: Grand Rounds Presentation, UTMB, Dept. of Otolaryngology DATE: January 7, 2004 RESIDENT PHYSICIAN: Gordon Shields, MD FACULTY ADVISOR: Francis B. Quinn,
More informationDiagnosis of Midface Fractures with CT: What the Surgeon Needs to Know 1
Note: This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues or clients, contact us at www.rsna.org/rsnarights. EDUCATION EXHIBIT
More informationUse of Intraoperative Computed Tomography for Revisional Procedures in Patients with Complex Maxillofacial Trauma
Use of Intraoperative Computed Tomography for Revisional Procedures in Patients with Complex Maxillofacial Trauma The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access
More informationMaxillofacial Injuries Practical Tips
Saturday, October 29, 2016 Maxillofacial Injuries Practical Tips Suyash Mohan MD, PDCC THE ROOTS OF PENN RADIOLOGY RADIOLOGICAL Assistant Professor of Radiology Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery Neuroradiology
More informationCT of Maxillofacial Fracture Patterns. CT of Maxillofacial Fracture Patterns
CT of Maxillofacial Fracture Patterns CT of Maxillofacial Fracture Patterns Stuart E. Mirvis, M.D., FACR Department of Radiology University of Maryland School of Medicine Viking 1 1976 MGS 2001 Technology
More informationThe diagnostic value of Computed Tomography in evaluation of maxillofacial Trauma
The diagnostic value of Computed Tomography in evaluation of maxillofacial Trauma Qais H. Muassa FICMS College of Dentistry, Babylon University Ibrahim S. Gataa, BDS, FICMS College of Dentistry, Sulaimania
More informationCurrent concepts in midface fracture management
REVIEW C URRENT OPINION Current concepts in midface fracture management AQ1 Alf L. Nastri and Ben Gurney AQ4 Purpose of review Management of midface trauma is complex and challenging and requires a clear
More informationCore Curriculum Syllabus Emergencies in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery FACIAL FRACTURES
Core Curriculum Syllabus Emergencies in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery A. General Considerations FACIAL FRACTURES Look for other fractures like skull and/or cervical spine fractures Test function
More informationORIGINAL ARTICLE. A Novel Technique for Malar Eminence Evaluation Using 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography
ORIGINAL ARTICLE A Novel Technique for Malar Eminence Evaluation Using 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography Sami P. Moubayed, MD; Frederick Duong, MD; Christian Ahmarani, MD, FRCSC; Akram Rahal, MD, FRCSC
More informationOriginal Research THE USE OF REFORMATTED CONE BEAM CT IMAGES IN ASSESSING MID-FACE TRAUMA, WITH A FOCUS ON THE ORBITAL FLOOR FRACTURES
DOI: 10.15386/cjmed-601 Original Research THE USE OF REFORMATTED CONE BEAM CT IMAGES IN ASSESSING MID-FACE TRAUMA, WITH A FOCUS ON THE ORBITAL FLOOR FRACTURES RALUCA ROMAN 1, MIHAELA HEDEȘIU 1, FLOAREA
More informationZYGOMATIC (MALAR) FRACTURES
b854_chapter-12.qxd 1/31/2011 9:40 AM Page 129 ZYGOMATIC (MALAR) FRACTURES CHAPTER 12 Anatomical articulations FZ Fronto-zygomatic ZT Zygomaticotemporal ZMB Zygomatico - maxillary buttress IO Infraorbital
More informationQuantitative Determination of
The Application of 3D Images for Quantitative Determination of Zygoma in an Asian Population Shih-Hsuan Mao, Yu-Hsuan Hsieh, Chih-Hao Chen, Chien-Tzung Chen Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery,
More informationThickened and thinner parts of the skull = important base for understanding of the functional structure of the skull - the transmission of masticatory
Functional structure of the skull and Fractures of the skull Thickened and thinner parts of the skull = important base for understanding of the functional structure of the skull - the transmission of masticatory
More informationFracture frontal bone and its management
From the SelectedWorks of Balasubramanian Thiagarajan March 1, 2013 Fracture frontal bone and its management Balasubramanian Thiagarajan Available at: https://works.bepress.com/drtbalu/14/ ISSN: 2250-0359
More informationORTHOGNATHIC SURGERY
ORTHOGNATHIC SURGERY MEDICAL POLICY Effective Date: February 1, 2017 Review Dates: 1/93, 7/95, 10/97, 4/99, 10/00, 8/01, 12/01, 4/02, 2/03, 1/04, 1/05, 12/05, 12/06, 12/07, 12/08, 12/09, 12/10, 12/11,
More informationProphylactic Midface Lift in Midfacial Trauma
Rapid Communication 347 Ryan Brown, MD 1 Kirk Lozada, MD 2 Sameep Kadakia, MD 2 Eli Gordin, MD 3 Yadranko Ducic, MD 4 1 Department of Otolaryngology, Kaiser Permanente, Denver, Colorado 2 Department of
More informationPediatric Craniofacial Injuries: Concept of Treatment
Med. J. Cairo Univ., Vol. 83, No. 1, March: 217-224, 201 5 www.medicaljournalofcairouniversity.net Pediatric Craniofacial Injuries: Concept of Treatment FAWZY T. AL-SAYED, Ph.D.* and MOHAMAD A. SHOEIB,
More informationHEAD & NECK IMAGING. Iranian Journal of Radiology September; 10(3): Published Online 2013 August 30.
Iranian Journal of Radiology. 2013 September; 10(3): 140-7. Published Online 2013 August 30. HEAD & NECK IMAGING 10.5812/iranjradiol.6353 Research Article Identification of Nasal Bone Fractures on Conventional
More informationManagement Strategies for Communited Fractures of Frontal Skull Base: An Institutional Experience
80 Original Article THIEME Management Strategies for Communited Fractures of Frontal Skull Base: An Institutional Experience V. Velho 1 Hrushikesh U. Kharosekar 1 Jasmeet S. Thukral 1 Shonali Valsangkar
More informationThe treatment of malocclusion after open reduction of maxillofacial fracture: a report of three cases
CASE REPORT http://dx.doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms..40.2.91 pissn 2234-7550 eissn 2234-5930 The treatment of malocclusion after open reduction of maxillofacial fracture: a report of three cases Sung-Suk Lee,
More informationComputed-Tomography of maxillofacial fractures: What do surgeons want to know?
Computed-Tomography of maxillofacial fractures: What do surgeons want to know? Poster No.: C-0968 Congress: ECR 2016 Type: Educational Exhibit Authors: A. Ammar, M. Jrad, I. KASRAOUI, A. Zoubli, H. Mizouni
More informationCLINICAL STUDY. Surgical Approaches and Fixation Patterns in Zygomatic Complex Fractures
CLINICAL STUDY Surgical Approaches and Fixation Patterns in Zygomatic Complex Fractures Sergio Olate, MS, Sergio Monteiro Lima Jr, DDS, Renato Sawazaki, PhD, Roger Willian Fernandes Moreira, PhD, and Márcio
More informationMultidetector computed tomographic evaluation of maxillofacial trauma
ORIGINAL ARTICLE ASIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES Multidetector computed tomographic evaluation of maxillofacial trauma Kaleem Ahmad 1, R. K. Rauniyar 2, Mukesh Kumar Gupta 3, Sajid Ansari 4, Ashok Raj
More informationMAXILLOFACIAL TRAUMA. The on-call maxillofacial surgeons can be contacted through the switchboard at the Southern General Hospital
MAXILLOFACIAL TRAUMA The on-call maxillofacial surgeons can be contacted through the switchboard at the Southern General Hospital Mandibular Injuries Mechanism of injury Assault, falls, RTA-Direct trauma
More informationTRAUMA TO THE FACE AND MOUTH
Dr.Yahya A. Ali 3/10/2012 F.I.C.M.S TRAUMA TO THE FACE AND MOUTH Bailey & Love s 25 th edition Injuries to the orofacial region are common, but the majority are relatively minor in nature. A few are major
More informationMidface fractures; what the radiologist should know.
Midface fractures; what the radiologist should know. Poster No.: C-1056 Congress: ECR 2013 Type: Educational Exhibit Authors: J. Garcia Villanego, E.-M. Heursen, A. Rodriguez Piñero; Cadiz/ES Keywords:
More informationORIGINAL ARTICLE. Titanium Mesh Repair of the Severely Comminuted Frontal Sinus Fracture. relatively uncommon maxillofacial
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Titanium Mesh Repair of the Severely Comminuted Frontal Sinus Fracture Raam S. Lakhani, MD; Terry Y. Shibuya, MD; Robert H. Mathog, MD; Steven C. Marks, MD; Don L. Burgio, MD; George H.
More informationNorth Oaks Trauma Symposium Friday, November 3, 2017
+ Evaluation and Management of Facial Trauma D Antoni Dennis, MD North Oaks ENT an Allergy November 3, 2017 + Financial Disclosure I do not have any conflicts of interest or financial interest to disclose
More informationSubciliary versus Subtarsal Approaches to Orbitozygomatic Fractures
CME Subciliary versus Subtarsal Approaches to Orbitozygomatic Fractures Rod J. Rohrich, M.D., Jeffrey E. Janis, M.D., and William P. Adams, Jr., M.D. Dallas, Texas Learning Objectives: After studying this
More informationCase Report Mid Facial Degloving Procedure: Managing A Case of Multiple Mid Face Fractures with Significant External Deformity
55 Bangladesh J Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 21(1): 51-56 Case Report Mid Facial Degloving Procedure: Managing A Case of Multiple Mid Face Fractures with Significant External Deformity Akhil Chndra Biswas 1,
More informationEthan M. Braunstein, M.D. 1, Steven A. Goldstein, Ph.D. 2, Janet Ku, M.S. 2, Patrick Smith, M.D. 2, and Larry S. Matthews, M.D. 2
Skeletal Radiol (1986) 15:27-31 Skeletal Radiology Computed tomography and plain radiography in experimental fracture healing Ethan M. Braunstein, M.D. 1, Steven A. Goldstein, Ph.D. 2, Janet Ku, M.S. 2,
More informationMaxillary Osteotomies and Bone Grafts for. Correction of Contoural and Occlusal
Maxillary Osteotomies and Bone Grafts for Correction of Contoural and Occlusal Deformities* M. L. LEWIN, M.D. RAVELO V. ARGAMASO, M.D. ABRAHAM I. FINGEROTH, D.D.S. Bronx, New York One of the major aims
More informationChapter 23: Maxillofacial Trauma. Robert B. Stanley, Jr.
Chapter 23: Maxillofacial Trauma Robert B. Stanley, Jr. Traditionally, fractures of the facial skeleton have been evaluated and treated in a segmentalized fashion, even if complex injuries were obvious
More informationBlindness and severe visual impairment in facial fractures: an 11 year review
British Journal of Plastic Surgery (2002), 55, 1-7 9 2002 The British Association of Plastic Surgeons doi: 10.1054Pojps.2001.3728 BRITISH JOURNAL OF [ ~ ] PLASTIC SURGERY Blindness and severe visual impairment
More informationJefferson Cephalometric Analysis--Face and Health Focused
Jefferson Cephalometric Analysis--Face and Health Focused Google: Jefferson Ceph Analysis Video Instruction for video instruction. Note: video instruction teaches how to find Center O. Center O is now
More informationInteresting Case Series. Virtual Surgical Planning in Orthognathic Surgery
Interesting Case Series Virtual Surgical Planning in Orthognathic Surgery Suraj Jaisinghani, MS, a Nicholas S. Adams, MD, b,c Robert J. Mann, MD, b,c,d John W. Polley, MD, b,c,d, and John A. Girotto, MD,
More informationTechnique Guide. Titanium Wire with Barb and Needle. Surgical Technique Guide for Canthal Tendon Prodecures.
Technique Guide Titanium Wire with Barb and Needle. Surgical Technique Guide for Canthal Tendon Prodecures. Indications/Features Indications The Synthes Titanium Wire with Barb and straight Needle is
More informationThe America Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons classify occlusion/malocclusion in to the following three categories:
Subject: Orthognathic Surgery Policy Effective Date: 04/2016 Revision Date: 07/2018 DESCRIPTION Orthognathic surgery is an open surgical procedure that corrects anomalies or malformations of the lower
More informationChapter 7: Head & Neck
Chapter 7: Head & Neck Osteology I. Overview A. Skull The cranium is composed of irregularly shaped bones that are fused together at unique joints called sutures The skull provides durable protection from
More informationTitle. Author(s)Matsushita, Kazuhiro; Yamamoto, Hidekazu. CitationBritish journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 5. Issue Date
Title Bilateral hypoplasia of the maxillary sinus : swelli Author(s)Matsushita, Kazuhiro; Yamamoto, Hidekazu CitationBritish journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 5 Issue Date 2017-04 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/68826
More informationDOWNLOAD OR READ : RIGID FIXATION FOR MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY PDF EBOOK EPUB MOBI
DOWNLOAD OR READ : RIGID FIXATION FOR MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY PDF EBOOK EPUB MOBI Page 1 Page 2 rigid fixation for maxillofacial surgery rigid fixation for maxillofacial pdf rigid fixation for maxillofacial
More informationFacial skeletal fractures are common,
CE This symbol indicates that there is more content in the online version of this article. Computed Tomography of Facial Fractures Bryant Furlow, BA Facial skeletal fractures are common, potentially serious,
More informationConventional radiograph verses CT for evaluation of sagittal fracture of mandibular condyle
Case Report: Conventional radiograph verses CT for evaluation of sagittal fracture of mandibular condyle Dr Anjali Wadhwa, Dr Gaurav Shah, Dr Shweta Sharma, Dr Anand Bhatnagar, Dr Pallavi Malaviya NIMS
More informationEpidemiology 3002). Epidemiology and Pathophysiology
Epidemiology Maxillofacial trauma or injuries are commonly encountered in the practice of emergency medicine and are presenting one of the most challenging problems to the attending surgeons or physicians
More informationWhat is Hemifacial Microsomia? By Pravin K. Patel, MD and Bruce S. Bauer, MD Children s Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL
What is Hemifacial Microsomia? By Pravin K. Patel, MD and Bruce S. Bauer, MD Children s Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL 773-880-4094 Early in the child s embryonic development the structures destined to
More informationTitanium Wire with Barb and Needle. Surgical Technique Guide for Canthal Tendon Procedures.
Titanium Wire with Barb and Needle. Surgical Technique Guide for Canthal Tendon Procedures. Technique Guide This publication is not intended for distribution in the USA. Instruments and implants approved
More informationBy JOHN MARQUIS CONVERSE, M.D., and DAUBERT TELSEY, D.D.S.
THE TRIPARTITE OSTEOTOMY OF THE MID-FACE FOR ORBITAL EXPANSION AND CORRECTION OF THE DEFORMITY IN CRANIOSTENOSIS By JOHN MARQUIS CONVERSE, M.D., and DAUBERT TELSEY, D.D.S. Center for Craniofacial Anomalies
More informationCLINICAL PRESENTATION AND RADIOLOGY QUIZ QUESTION
Donald L. Renfrew, MD Radiology Associates of the Fox Valley, 333 N. Commercial Street, Suite 100, Neenah, WI 54956 11/24/2012 Radiology Quiz of the Week # 100 Page 1 CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND RADIOLOGY
More informationA Study of Classification Systems for Maxillectomy Defects
A Study of Classification Systems for Maxillectomy Defects Zubair Durrani FFDRCS, FRCS, FRCS (OMFS)* Syed Ghazanfar Hassan FFDRCS** Shomaila Ameer Alam BDS*** * Associate Professor & Consultant Oral and
More informationChapter 7. Skeletal System
Chapter 7 Skeletal System 1 Skull A. The skull is made up of 22 bones: 8 cranial bones, 13 facial bones, and the mandible. B. The Cranium encloses and protects the brain, provides attachments for muscles,
More informationORTHOGNATHIC SURGERY
Status Active Medical and Behavioral Health Policy Section: Surgery Policy Number: IV-16 Effective Date: 10/22/2014 Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota medical policies do not imply that members should
More informationPost-operative stability of the maxilla treated with Le Fort I and horseshoe osteotomies in bimaxillary surgery
European Journal of Orthodontics 24 (2002) 471 476 2002 European Orthodontic Society Post-operative stability of the maxilla treated with Le Fort I and horseshoe osteotomies in bimaxillary surgery Kiyoshi
More informationORIGINAL ARTICLE. most commonly result. involving the paranasal sinuses, the overlying facial skin, or both. Such defects may result in substantial
ORIGINAL ARTICLE Use of Precontoured Positioning Plates and Pericranial Flaps in Midfacial Reconstruction to Optimize Aesthetic and Functional Outcomes Yadranko Ducic, MD, FRCSC; Lance E. Oxford, MD Objectives:
More informationISOLATED ZYGOMATIC BONE FRACTURE; MANAGEMENT BY THREE POINT FIXATION
The Professional Medical Journal 1. BDS, FCPS 2. BDS, FCPS 3. BDS, MSc Community Dentistry 4. BDS, MSc (Trainee) 5. MBBS, FRCS Associate Professor General Surgery LUMHS, Correspondence Address: Dr. Suneel
More informationCHAPTER 8 SECTION 1.4 ORAL SURGERY TRICARE/CHAMPUS POLICY MANUAL M DEC 1998 SPECIAL BENEFIT INFORMATION
TRICARE/CHAMPUS POLICY MANUAL 6010.47-M DEC 1998 SPECIAL BENEFIT INFORMATION CHAPTER 8 SECTION 1.4 Issue Date: October 8, 1986 Authority: 32 CFR 199.4(e)(10) I. DESCRIPTION There are certain oral surgical
More informationSensitivity of a Method for the Analysis of Facial Mobility. II. Interlandmark Separation
Sensitivity of a Method for the Analysis of Facial Mobility. II. Interlandmark Separation CARROLL-ANN TROTMAN, B.D.S., M.A., M.S. JULIAN J. FARAWAY, PH.D. Objective: This study demonstrates a method of
More informationNasal and nasoethmoidal-orbital fractures: A continuum of injury. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, UCLA Olive View Medical Center, Sylmar, California
CASE REPORT Nasal and nasoethmoidal-orbital fractures: A continuum of injury Mohammed M Elahi MD MSc FRCSC 1, Bernard L Markowitz MD FACS 1,2 1 Division of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, UCLA School
More informationThree Dimensional Titanium Mini Plates in Management of Mandibular Fractures
Biomedical & Pharmacology Journal Vol. 7(1), 241-246 (2014) Three Dimensional Titanium Mini Plates in Management of Mandibular Fractures R. BALAKRISHNAN, VIJAY EBENEZER and ABU DAKIR Department of Oral
More informationThe impact-absorbing effects of facial fractures in closed-head injuries
J Neurosurg66:542-547, 1987 The impact-absorbing effects of facial fractures in closed-head injuries An analysis of 2 l0 patients K. FRANCIS LEE, M.D., LOUS K. WAGNER~ PH.D., Y. EUGENIA LEE, M.D., JUNG
More informationSLLF FOR TMJ CASES IN ADULT DENTITION SEVERE BRACHIFA BRACHIF FACIAL
SLLF FOR TMJ CASES IN ADULT DENTITION SEVERE BRACHIFAFACIAL TMJ: Severe Postural Imbalance+Severe Myofascial Pain Syndrome, severe soreness Temporalis Tendon RL, Sternocleidomastoideus RL Age:39 years
More informationChapter 7 Part A The Skeleton
Chapter 7 Part A The Skeleton Why This Matters Understanding the anatomy of the skeleton enables you to anticipate problems such as pelvic dimensions that may affect labor and delivery The Skeleton The
More informationAn increasing body of evidence during the last decade. Long-term sequelae after surgery for orbital floor fractures
Long-term sequelae after surgery for orbital floor fractures LENA FOLKESTAD, MD, and THOMAS WESTIN, MD, PhD, Göteborg, Sweden A surgical technique involving exact repositioning and rigid fixation is required
More informationMandibular Dimensional Changes with aging in Three Dimensional Computed Tomographic Study in 21 to 50 Year old Men and Women
Mandibular Dimensional Changes with aging in Three Dimensional Computed Tomographic Study in 21 to 50 Year old Men and Women Original Article Roshanak Ghaffari 1, Abolfath Hosseinzade 2, Hossein Zarabi
More informationCephalometric Analysis
Cephalometric Analysis of Maxillary and Mandibular Growth and Dento-Alveolar Change Part III In two previous articles in the PCSO Bulletin s Faculty Files, we discussed the benefits and limitations of
More informationHead and Neck Trauma. Disclosures: Acknowledgments: Introductory case. None
Head and Neck Trauma None Disclosures: Edward P. Quigley III MD PhD Radiology and Imaging Sciences University of Utah Dr. Richard Wiggins III Dr. Yoshimi Anzai Dr. Lindell Gentry Dr. Blair Winegar Dr.
More informationJaw locking after maxillofacial trauma
106 Jaw locking after maxillofacial trauma David B. Kamadjaja and R. Soesanto Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Faculty of Dentistry Airlangga University Surabaya - Indonesia abstract The purpose
More informationcally, a distinct superior crease of the forehead marks this spot. The hairline and
4 Forehead The anatomical boundaries of the forehead unit are the natural hairline (in patients without alopecia), the zygomatic arch, the lower border of the eyebrows, and the nasal root (Fig. 4.1). The
More informationOPERATIVE CORRECTION BY OSTEOTOMY OF RECESSED MALAR MAXILLARY COMPOUND IN A CASE OF OXYCEPHALY
OPERATIVE CORRECTION BY OSTEOTOMY OF RECESSED MALAR MAXILLARY COMPOUND IN A CASE OF OXYCEPHALY By Sir HAROLD GILLIES, C.B.E., F.R.C.S., and STEWART H. HARRISON, F.R.C.S., L.D.S., R.C.S. From the Plastic
More informationFacial Trauma ASHNR. Disclosures: Acknowledgments: None. Edward P. Quigley, III, MD PhD University of Utah
Disclosures: Facial Trauma ASHNR Edward P. Quigley, III, MD PhD University of Utah None Acknowledgments: Dr. Rebecca Cornelius Dr. Ilona M. Schmalfuss Dr. Richard Wiggins III Dr. Yoshimi Anzai Dr. Lindell
More informationManagement of Craniofacial injuries
Management of Craniofacial injuries Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Cirujanos PlástiKos Mundi Cranio-Facial Trauma 1. Introduction Cranio-facial trauma is as old as the human race. What has changed
More informationTHE USE OF TEMPORARY ANCHORAGE DEVICES FOR MOLAR INTRUSION & TREATMENT OF ANTERIOR OPEN BITE By Eduardo Nicolaievsky D.D.S.
THE USE OF TEMPORARY ANCHORAGE DEVICES FOR MOLAR INTRUSION & TREATMENT OF ANTERIOR OPEN BITE By Eduardo Nicolaievsky D.D.S. Skeletal anchorage, the concept of using the facial skeleton to control tooth
More informationYi Zhang, MD, PhD, DDS,* Yang He, MD, PhD, DDS, Zhi Yong Zhang, MD, PhD, DDS, and Jin Gang An, MD, PhD, DDS
J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:2070-2075, 2010 Evaluation of the Application of Computer-Aided Shape-Adapted Fabricated Titanium Mesh for Mirroring-Reconstructing Orbital Walls in Cases of Late Post-Traumatic
More informationHuman Healed Trauma Skull
Human Healed Trauma Skull Product Number: Specimen Evaluated: BC-303 Original Specimen Skeletal Inventory: 1 Cranium with full dentition (teeth ##1-16) 1 Mandible with full dentition (teeth ##17-32) Osteological
More informationAnatomy and Physiology. Bones, Sutures, Teeth, Processes and Foramina of the Human Skull
Anatomy and Physiology Chapter 6 DRO Bones, Sutures, Teeth, Processes and Foramina of the Human Skull Name: Period: Bones of the Human Skull Bones of the Cranium: Frontal bone: forms the forehead and the
More informationRadiological anatomy of frontal sinus By drtbalu
2009 Radiological anatomy of frontal sinus By drtbalu Anatomy of frontal sinus is highly variable. Precise understanding of these variables will help a surgeon to avoid unnecessary complications during
More informationDownloaded from Medico Research Chronicles Assault injury to the face with an axe- A rare case report.
ISSN No. 2394-3971 Case Report ASSAULT INJURY TO THE FACE WITH AN AXE- A RARE CASE REPORT Dr Sandhya K 1, Dr Bobby John 2, Dr Shobitha G 3 1 Senior resident, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,
More informationwww.oralradiologists.com CONE BEAM CT REPORT CASE XXXX Patient information Patient Name: - Referring Doctor: - Patient DOB: - Scan Date: [Start date] Reason for Exam: Maxillary facial pain Doctor Notes:
More informationLATERAL CEPHALOMETRIC EVALUATION IN CLEFT PALATE PATIENTS
POLSKI PRZEGLĄD CHIRURGICZNY 2009, 81, 1, 23 27 10.2478/v10035-009-0004-2 LATERAL CEPHALOMETRIC EVALUATION IN CLEFT PALATE PATIENTS PRADEEP JAIN, ANAND AGARWAL, ARVIND SRIVASTAVA Department of Plastic
More informationReduction of Closed Frontal Sinus Fractures through Suprabrow Approach
Archives of Craniofacial Surgery Arch Craniofac Surg Vol.18 No.4, 230-237 https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2017.18.4.230 Reduction of Closed Frontal Sinus Fractures through Suprabrow Approach Original Article
More informationMcHenry Western Lake County EMS System Paramedic, EMT-B and PHRN Optional Continuing Education 2019 #1 Facial Trauma
McHenry Western Lake County EMS System Paramedic, EMT-B and PHRN Optional Continuing Education 2019 #1 Facial Trauma The face is vital to human appearance and function. Facial injuries can impair a patient
More informationManagement of Extensive Maxillofacial Trauma With Bony Foreign Body Within the Orbit From a Chainsaw Injury
Management of Extensive Maxillofacial Trauma With Bony Foreign Body Within the Orbit From a Chainsaw Injury Randall O. Craft, MD, a Kyle R. Eberlin, MD, a Michael H. Stella, MD, b and Edward J. Caterson,
More informationINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL COLLEGE
INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL COLLEGE Joint Degree Master Program: Implantology and Dental Surgery (M.Sc.) Specialized Modules: List of individual modules Specialized Module 1 Basic principles of implantology
More information3D-MODEL CUSTOM-MADE MODELS SEGMENTATION AND PRODUCTION SERVICE OF BONE MODELS WITH HIGHEST 3D PRINTING RESOLUTION
CUSTOM-MADE MODELS 3D-MODEL SEGMENTATION AND PRODUCTION SERVICE OF BONE MODELS WITH HIGHEST 3D PRINTING RESOLUTION FOLLOW US ON CUSTOM-MADE MODELS 3D-MODEL From a CT or CBCT scan, 3D-model service provides
More informationTemporal miniplates in the frontozygomatic area an anatomical study
1 Temporal miniplates in the frontozygomatic area an anatomical study Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic 1* Yves Stenio Lima Cavalcanti 2 Peter Reher 3 1 DDS; Address: Av. Raja Gabaglia, 1000/1209 Gutierrez Belo Horizonte,
More informationBONE GRAFTING IN TREATMENT OF CLEFT LIP AND PALATE 337
PRIMARY BONE GRAFTING IN THE TREATMENT OF CLEFT LIP AND PALATE WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO ALVEOLAR COLLAPSE By FRANK ROBINSON, F.R.C.S., and BARRIE WOOD, L.D.S. Burns and Plastic Surgery Unit, Booth Hall
More informationIntroduction. patterns of injury. The injury pattern produced vanes with. j the object striking the face.
Dolan et al. Facial fractures I Introduction Facial injury constitutes a frequent finding among emergency room patients. Schultz and Oldham estimate that 54% of such patients will have significant trauma.
More informationVisibility of Maxillary and Mandibular Anatomical Landmarks in Digital Panoramic Radiographs: A Retrospective Study
Visibility of Maxillary and Mandibular Anatomical Landmarks in Digital Panoramic Radiographs: A Retrospective Study Srisha Basappa, Smitha JD, Nishath Khanum*, Santosh Kanwar, Mahesh MS and Archana Patil
More informationScrew hole-positioning guide and plate-positioning guide: A novel method to assist mandibular reconstruction
Journal of Dental Sciences (2012) 7, 301e305 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.e-jds.com CASE REPORT Screw hole-positioning guide and plate-positioning guide: A novel method
More informationDiagnostic performance of brain computed tomography to detect facial bone fractures
Clin Exp Emerg Med 2018;5(2):107-112 https://doi.org/10.15441/ceem.17.223 Diagnostic performance of brain computed tomography to detect facial bone fractures Duk Ho Kim 1, Yoon Hee Choi 1, Seong Jong Yun
More informationMalignant growth Maxilla management an analysis
ISSN: 2250-0359 Volume 3 Issue 2 2013 Malignant growth Maxilla management an analysis *Balasubramanian Thiagarajan *Geetha Ramamoorthy *Stanley Medical College Abstract: Malignant tumors involving maxilla
More informationDr.Sepideh Falah-kooshki
Dr.Sepideh Falah-kooshki MAXILLA Premaxillary/median palatal suture (radiolucent). Incisive fossa and foramen (radiolucent). Nasal passages (radiolucent). Nasal septum (radiopaque). Anterior nasal spine
More informationMulti Detector Computed Tomography Evaluation of Spectrum of Facial Fractures in Motor Vehicle Accidents
Original Article Multi Detector Computed Tomography Evaluation of Spectrum of Facial Fractures in Motor Vehicle Accidents DOI: 10.7860/IJARS/2016/20367:2160 Radiology Section Vijay Kumar K R, Bharath B
More informationComplications of Midface Fractures
557 Kirkland Lozada, MD 1 Sameep Kadakia, MD 1 Manoj T. Abraham, MD 2 Yadranko Ducic, MD, FRCS(C), FACS 3 1 Department of Otolaryngology, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of MountSinai,NewYork,NewYork 2
More informationIntroduction to Occlusion and Mechanics of Mandibular Movement
Introduction to Occlusion and Mechanics of Mandibular Movement Dr. Pauline Hayes Garrett Department of Endodontics, Prosthodontics, and Operative Dentistry University of Maryland, Baltimore Assigned reading
More informationTopic: Orthognathic Surgery Date of Origin: October 5, Section: Surgery Last Reviewed Date: December 2013
Medical Policy Manual Topic: Orthognathic Surgery Date of Origin: October 5, 2004 Section: Surgery Last Reviewed Date: December 2013 Policy No: 137 Effective Date: March 1, 2014 IMPORTANT REMINDER Medical
More informationImaging of the Paranasal Sinuses
14. Sommerschule Imaging of the Paranasal Sinuses Bettlach 24.08.2018 Christoph Schlegel Conventional Radiology NNH-Status: okzipito-frontal: frontal sinus, anterior ethmoid okzipito-nasal : maxillary
More information