A Proposed Easy-to-Use Classification of Mandibular Fractures

Abstract

Back ground: There are many classifications for mandibular fractures but all are not without complexity, making it difficult to use in emergency departments. A radiologist, maxillofacial surgeons and other clinicians feel problems in classifying these fractures. Researchers proposed many classifications to facilitate clinicians in describing these fractures. All these efforts remained an successful as no such classification has been put forward. A comprehensive and easy to use classification is being proposed in this article. Objectives: 1. To analyze mandibular fractures on clinical and radiological bases. 2. To classify mandibular fractures on the basis of this analysis. Material & Methods : In this study we evaluated 2767 fracture lines in 1745 patients. The location and the number of fracture lines were analyzed. Results : The patterns of multiple mandibular fractures show the fracture of the body of the mandible on both side (b-b) occurred in 421 (24.1%) patients while fracture of the body of the mandible with condylar process fracture (b-c) occurred in 456 (26.1%) cases and numerous fractures hit 72 (4.1%) cases. Fractures of the body of the mandible with condylar process fractures on both sides (b-c-c) have occurred in 8 (0.5%) cases, while fractures of both side of the body of mandible with the condylar process (b-b-c) occurred in 5 (0.3%) cases. Conclusion : Easy-to-use classification of mandibular fractures have been proposed on the basis of finding of this study. Clinical relevance : FLIDOT is an easy word to remember and describing a mandibular fracture very conveniently as F stands for fracture type, L for fracture site, I for presence of infection, D for fracture dislocation, O for occlusal disturbances and T for presence of tooth in fracture line.

References

1. 1.Dingman RO, Natvig P. Surgery of facial fractures. Philadelphia: W. Saunders; 1969:142-44.
2. 2.Kelly D, Harrigan W. A survey of facial fractures, Bellevue Hospital (1948-1974). J Oral Surg 1975; 33:146-49.
3. 3.Pogrel MA, Kaban L. Mandibular fracture. In: Habel/ Arian BC. Facial fractures, Toronto, Philadelphia: Decker Inc; 1989:183-229.
4. 4.GratzA.Classificationoffracture.In:SpiesslB.Internal FixationoftheMandible,Berlin,Haidelberg:Springer- Verlag; 1989:152-59.
5. 5.Pankratov A, Robustova T. A classification of mandibular fractures. Stomatologia M 2001; 2:29-31.
6. 6.ICD-10. World Health Organization, Geneva; 2003:261-62.
7. 7.BooleJR,HoltelM,AmorosoP,YoreM.5196Mandible Fractures Among 4381 Active Duty Army Soldiers, 1980 to 1998. Laryngoscope 2001; 111:1691–96.
8. 8.Czerwinski M, Parker WL, Chehade A, Williams HB. Identification of mandibular fracture epidemiology in Canada: Enhancing injury prevention and patient evaluation. Can J Plast Surg 2008; 16:36-40.
9. 9.Buitrago-Téllez CH, Audigé L, Strong B, Gavelin P, Hirsch J, Ehrenfeld M et al. A Comprehensive Classification of Mandibular Fractures: A preliminary agreement validation study. Inter J Oral Maxillfac Surg 2008; 37:1080-88.
10. 10.Schuknecht B, Graetz K. Radiologic assessment of maxillofacial,mandibular,andskullbasetrauma.Euro Radio 2005; 15:560-68. Original Article