Abstract
Introduction
The purpose/aim of the study conducted was to compare the efficiency between two principles of plating system, 3D non locking mini plates versus 3D locking mini plates.
Materials and Methods
A total of 20 adult patients were selected according to the inclusion criteria and divided into two groups of locking plates/screws and non-locking plates/screws of ten each. All patients were treated with 2.0 mm 3D locking and non locking mini plates and screw system. Comparison of ease of use, functional stability, operator’s comfort were tabulated.
Results
A total of 27 fractures in 20 patients were treated. Each group contained ten patients. Fracture reduction was good in all the cases. At the follow up of 3 months, all fractures had healed, only one patient had a occlusal discrepancy.
Conclusion
There was no difference in the stability in both the groups. Intra operatively locking group consumed more time in fixation as it demands precision in making a hole exactly in the centre of plate necessitating the use of drill guide. Clinical and radiographic healing was good in both the groups.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bouloux GF, Chen S, Threadgill JMC (2012) Small and large titanium plates are equally effective for treating mandible fractures. JOMS 70:1613–1621
Kumar BP, Kumar J, Mohan AP, Venkatesh V (2012) A comparative study of three dimensional stainless steel plate versus stainless steel miniplate in the management of mandibular parasymphysis fracture. J Bio Innov 1(2):19–32
Jain MK, Manjunath KS, Bhagwan BK, Dipit K (2010) Comparison of 3-dimensional and standard miniplate fixation in the management of mandibular fractures. JOMS 68:1568–1572
Zix J, Lieger O, Iizuka T (2007) Use of straight and curved 3-dimensional titanium miniplates for fracture fixation at the mandibular angle. JOMS 65:1758–1763
Collins CP, Leonard PG, Tolas A (2004) A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing 2.0-mm locking plates to 2.0-mm standard plates in treatment of mandible fractures. JOMS 62:1392–1395
Gandhi L, Kattimani VS (2012) Three dimensional bone plating system in the management of mandibular fractures—a clinical study. AED 4(2):42–52
Guimond C, Johnson JV, Marchena JM (2005) Fixation of mandibular angle fractures with a 2.0-mm 3-dimensional curved angle strut plate. JOMS 63:209–214
Lucca M, Mckenzie KSW, Kraus J, Finkelman M, Wein R (2010) Comparison of treatment outcomes associated with early versus late treatment of mandible fractures: a retrospective chart review and analysis. JMOS 68:2484–2488
Kumar N, Malhan S, Mahajan S, Asi KS (2012) Titanium miniplate osteosynthesis of mandibular fractures. IJDS 1(4):21–24
Fordyce AM, Lalani Z, Songra AK, Hildreth AJ, Carton ATM, Hawkesford JE (1999) Intermaxillary fixation is not usually necessary to reduce mandibular fractures. BJOMS 37:52–57
Wan K, Williamson RA, Gebauer D (2012) Open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular angle fractures: does the transbuccal technique produce fewer complications after treatment than the transoral technique? JOMS 70:2620–2628
Kamboozia HA, Moorthy PA (1993) The fate of teeth in mandibular fracture lines. IJOMS 22:97–101
Goyal M, Marya K, Chawla S, Pandey R (2010) Mandibular: a comparative evaluation of two different fixation systems using 2.0 mm titanium miniplates and 3D locking plates. JMOS 10(1):32–37
Mittal G, Dubbudu RM, Cariappa MK (2011) Three dimensional titanium mini plates in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a prospective clinical trial. JMOS 11:24–28
Khalifa EM, Hawary HE, Hussein MM (2012) Titanium three dimensional miniplate versus conventional titanium miniplate in fixation of anterior mandibular fractures. LSJ 9(2):1006–1010
Ebenzer V, Ramalingam B (2011) Three-dimensional miniplate fixation in mandibular angle fractures. IJMD 1(2):89–93
Ellis E, Graham J (2002) Use of a 2.0-mm locking plate/screw system for mandibular fracture surgery. JOMS 60:642–645
Al-Jandan BA, Al-Sulaiman AA, Marei HF, Syed FA, Almana M (2012) Thickness of buccal bone in the mandible and its clinical significance in mono-cortical screws placement. A CBCT analysis. IJOMS. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.06.009
Richard HH, Street CC, Goltz M (2002) Does plate adaptation affect stability? A biomechanical comparison of locking and nonlocking plates. JOMS 60:1319–1326
Gutwald R, Alpert B, Schmelzeisen R (2003) Principle and stability of locking plates. Keio J Med 52(1):21–24
Pektas ZO, Bayram B, Balcik C, Develi T (2011) Effects of different mandibular fracture patterns on the stability of miniplate screw fixation in angle mandibular fractures. IJOMS 41:339–343
Malhotra K, Sharma A, Giraddi G (2012) Versatility of titanium 3D plate in comparison with conventional miniplate fixation for the management of mandibular fracture. JMOS 11(3):284–290
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Singh, A., Arunkumar, K.V. Standard 3D Titanium Miniplate Versus Locking 3D Miniplate in Fracture of Mandible: A Prospective Comparative Study. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 15, 164–172 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-015-0817-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-015-0817-y