Is there any difference in the treatment outcome of maxillofacial fractures following use of rigid or semi-rigid osteosynthesis?

Abstract

The objective of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes of patients with maxillofacial fractures treated with rigid and non-rigid osteosynthesis and to compare the outcomes of both treatment protocols. The study design is descriptive and retrospective. The method involved the retrieval and assessment of all cases of 'pure' maxillofacial fractures treated with plates (rigid) and wires (non-rigid) protocols for a two and a half year period between  (January 2009 and June 2011).Information of interest includes demographics, types of fracture, treatment done and outcome of treatment. Retrieved data showed that 462 specific diagnoses of maxillofacial fractures were made in 207 patients. 105 of patients treated with rigid osteosynthesis and 102 treated with non-rigid osteosynthesis. 43 unsuccessful outcome measures were identified in the post-operative review period, made up of 5 in patients  treated with rigid osteosynthesis, 38 in patients treated with non-rigid osteosynthesis. This was statistically  significant (P<0.05) and odds ratio (OR) of 11.9 was calculated. This audit reveals a better clinical outcome of treatment of maxillofacial fractures, using rigid osteosynthesis compared with the traditional method of non-rigid protocol. It could be concluded that risk for unsuccessful outcome was about 12 times in patients receiving  treatment with non-rigid protocol and suggests an appropriately designed comparative study for a wholesome evaluation of the outcomes of maxillofacial fractures, using both treatment protocols.