Correlation between Condylar Fracture Pattern after Parasymphyseal Impact and Condyle Morphological Features: A Retrospective Analysis of 107 Chinese Patients.

Lu HAN; Ting LONG; Wei TANG; Lei LIU; Wei JING; Wei-Dong TIAN; Jie LONG

Return

Correlation between Condylar Fracture Pattern after Parasymphyseal Impact and Condyle Morphological Features: A Retrospective Analysis of 107 Chinese Patients.

Author: Lu HAN ¹ ; Ting LONG ² ; Wei TANG ² ; Lei LIU ² ; Wei JING ² ; Wei-Dong TIAN ² ; Jie LONG ³ ;
Author Information

1. State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, West China School of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, West China School of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
3. State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041
Publication Type:Journal Article
MeSH: Adult; Female; Fractures, Bone; surgery; Humans; Male; Mandibular Condyle; injuries; surgery; Mandibular Fractures; surgery; Middle Aged; Multivariate Analysis; Retrospective Studies; Young Adult
From: Chinese Medical Journal 2017;130(4):420-427
CountryChina
Language:English
Abstract:
BACKGROUNDThe treatment of the condylar fractures is difficult. Factors that result in the fractures are complex. The objective of this morphometric study was to investigate the relationship between condylar fracture patterns and condylar morphological characteristics.
METHODSWe conducted a retrospective analysis of 107 patients admitted to the West China Hospital of Stomatology for bilateral condylar fractures caused by parasymphyseal impact. The patients were divided into five groups according to the type of condylar fracture. Ten parameters were evaluated on three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction mandible models through the Mimics 16.0 (Materialize Leuven, Belgium) anthropometry toolkit. Each parameter of the 3D models was analyzed using multivariate analysis. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to examine the relationships between the five groups.
RESULTSThe results showed that the differences of condylar head width (M1), condylar neck width (M3), the ratio of condylar head width to condylar anteroposterior diameter (M1/M2), the ratio of condylar head width to condylar neck width (M1/M3), the ratio of condylar height to ramus height (M8/M7), and mandibular angle (M10) were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Type A condylar head fractures were positively associated with M1 (compared to Type B: OR =1.627, 95% CI: 1.123, 2.359; compared to Type C: OR = 1.705, 95% CI: 1.170, 2.484) and M1/M2 (compared to Type B: OR =1.034, 95% CI: 0.879, 2.484). Type B condylar head fractures were negatively associated with M10 (compared to Type C: OR = 0.909, 95% CI: 0.821, 1.007). Condylar neck fractures were negatively associated with M3 (compared to condylar head: OR = 0.382, CI: 0.203, 0.720 ; compared to condylar base: OR = 0.436, 95% CI: 0.218, 0.874), and positively associated with M1/M3 (compared to condylar head: OR = 1.229, 95% CI: 1.063, 1.420 compared to condylar base: OR = 1.223, 95% CI: 1.034, 1.447). Condylar base fractures were positively associated with M10 (OR = 1.095, 95% CI: 1.008, 1.189) and negatively associated with M8/M7 (OR = 0.855, 95% CI: 0.763, 0.959) as compared with condylar head fractures.
CONCLUSIONSCondylar fracture pattern is associated with the anatomical features of the condyles when a fracture occurs from parasymphyseal impact.