Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
   
  Home | About us | Editorial board | Search
Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Advertise
Instructions | Online submission| Contact us | Subscribe |

 

Login  | Users Online: 1200  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 



 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 452-455  

A study of mandibular fractures over a 5-year period of time: A retrospective study


Department of Oral Surgery, Jodhpur Dental College and Hospital, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

Date of Web Publication14-Oct-2014

Correspondence Address:
Ashish Vyas
10/7 Chopasni Housing Board, First Puliya, Jodhpur - 342 008, Rajasthan
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.142808

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Objective: This study aims to evaluate and compare with the existing literature on the etiology, pattern, gender, and anatomical distribution of mandibular fractures. Materials and Methods: The data of 225 cases were analyzed over a period of 5 years between March 2009 and November 2013. Of this 110 were unilateral, 23 bilateral, 18 symphysis and 74 multiple fractures. Results: Males are more affected than females.The peak incidence rate is occurring in 30-35 years of age group. The most common fracture site is parasymphysis and least common site is ramus of mandible. The most common etiological factor is road traffic accident (RTA) (45.3%) followed by falls (42.6%), assaults (8.9%), sport injuries (2.2%), and gunshot wounds (0.89%). Conclusion: Thus, we conclude that RTA is the leading cause of mandibular fractures and males are more affected. The most common site is parasymphysis fracture in association with angle fracture. We observed that gender was significantly associated with body and angle fracture (P = 0.04) and significant relationship between etiology with multiple site fracture such as (parasymphysis-angle), (body-condyle), (body-angle), and (symphysis-condyle) was observed (P ≤ 0.05).

Keywords: Mandibular fracture, parasymphysis fracture, road traffic accident


How to cite this article:
Vyas A, Mazumdar U, Khan F, Mehra M, Parihar L, Purohit C. A study of mandibular fractures over a 5-year period of time: A retrospective study. Contemp Clin Dent 2014;5:452-5

How to cite this URL:
Vyas A, Mazumdar U, Khan F, Mehra M, Parihar L, Purohit C. A study of mandibular fractures over a 5-year period of time: A retrospective study. Contemp Clin Dent [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Sep 19];5:452-5. Available from: http://www.contempclindent.org/text.asp?2014/5/4/452/142808


   Introduction Top


Mandibular fractures comprise most of the traumatic injuries, which are treated by an oral and maxillofacial surgeon. The facial area is one of the most commonly fractured site of the body, [1]],[[2]],[[3] of which mandible is the most frequent. [1],[4],[5] Injuries of the maxillofacial area can be psychologically disturbing for patients with a functional impact. [6] According to several studies, they account for 15.5-59% of all facial fractures. [7]],[[8]],[[9]],[[10] A fracture is defined as "breach in the continuity of the bone." [11] The occurrence of facial injuries tends to be high compared to injuries in other parts of the body because the face is without a protective covering, and the mandible the most prominent bone in this region of the body. [12],[13] However, the presence of teeth in the mandible is the most important anatomical factor, which makes its fracture different from fractures elsewhere in the body. [14],[15] This article aims to analyze retrospectively the age and gender distribution, etiology, and anatomic distribution of mandibular fractures among patients who visited Jodhpur Dental College and Hospital, Jodhpur, Rajasthan in a 5-year period.


   Materials and Methods Top


Before the start of the study, ethical clearance was obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Institutional Review Board of Jodhpur Dental College and General Hospital. The data for this study were obtained from the medical records of 225 cases treated at Jodhpur Dental College and Hospital, Jodhpur, Rajasthan during the 5 years period between March 2009 and November 2013. Information was collected from the clinical and surgical notes of each of the patients in a standardized and systematic pattern. The demographic variables such as age, gender, and residence were assessed. Clinical information included diagnosis, etiology, and anatomical distribution of mandibular fractures was assessed.


   Results Top


In this study, we observed that, total number of patients with mandibular fractures were 225, among them unilateral fractures were 110 (49%), bilateral fractures 23 (10.2%), symphysis 18 (8%), and multiple fractures were 74 (32.9%). Among unilateral fractures right side were 76 (69%) and left side were 34 (31%). Of 18 symphysis fracture three cases had unilateral canine impaction which was seen in OPG. Demographic variables and etiology were not statistically significant with a total number of fractures  [Table 1].
Table 1: Total number of mandibular fracture


Click here to view


Most common cause of fracture was road traffic accident (RTA) 102 (45.3%) followed by falls 96 (42.6%), assaults 20 (8.9%), sport injuries 5 (2.2%) and least commonly from gunshot wounds 2 (0.89%). Thus, we noticed that most common cause was RTA because of increasing number of vehicles now-a-days [Graph 1] [Additional file 1].

Among unilateral fractures, the most common site was parasymphysis area and among bilateral was body region. The least common site was the ramus region. Demographic variables and etiology were not statistically significant with distribution of fracture according to anatomic site [Table 2].
Table 2: Distribution of mandibular fractures according to anatomic site


Click here to view


The order of fracture site from most common to least common were parasymphysis 49 (32.45%), body 42 (27.8%), angle 22 (14.56%), symphysis 18 (11.9%), condyle 13 (8.6%), coronoid 4 (2.64%), and lastly the ramus 3 (1.98%). The data for it is presented below [Graph 2] [Additional file 2].

This study revealed that gender was significantly associated with body and angle fracture (P = 0.04) and significant relationship between etiology with multiple site fracture such as parasymphysis-angle, body-condyle, body-angle, and symphysis-condyle was observed (P ≤ 0.05) [Table 3].
Table 3: Distribution of multiple mandibular fracture site


Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Various studies on the incidence of mandibular fractures in different countries have been studied. The sheer pace of modern life with high-speed travel as well as an increasingly violent and intolerant society has made facial trauma a form of social disease from which no one is immune. [16] Mandible fractures if remains undiagnosed or inappropriately treated may lead to severe consequences on the cosmetic, functional and psychological aspects of the patients. The epidemiology of mandibular fractures has changed dramatically with the advent of higher speed limits, new seat belt and helmet laws, and increased urban violence. [16] Males were predominantly affected, which is in agreement with other studies. [8],[17] due to more involvement in outdoor activities.

Most frequent cause of fracture mandible in this study was RTA, which is in accordance with Luce et al., [18] Bataineh, [19] Shah et al., [20] Al Ahmed et al., [21] and Brasileiro and Passeri. [22] This was due to increasing number of vehicles, high-speed driving, less use of seat belts and absence of airbags in most of the vehicles and alcohol abuse during driving. In this study, fall from height is the second common etiologic factor accounting for 42.6% of the cases.

The anatomic distribution and incidence of mandibular fracture are widely variable. [23] Many authors reported symphysis [24] as the most frequently affected site whereas, others reported this to be mandibular body, [2],[8],[17],[19] angle [16],[25],[26] and condyle. [20],[21] In this study, the parasymphysis was the most frequently affected site probably due to the presence of permanent tooth buds in the pediatric mandible presenting a high tooth to bone ratio, while in adults it is partly to the length of canine root making the mandible anatomically weak in this region leading to most fractures. Among multiple fracture site we observed that the parasymphysis was commonly associated with angle, which is in accordance with the study by Dongas and Hall [25] and contrary to Ogundare et al. [26] have reported body with angle as the most common combination.

The incidence of mandibular fracture in this study increased with age above 25 years. The ages of the patient were divided into two groups: Group I below 25 years and II above 25 years. We found that the majority of cases were in Group II. This could be explained as children until the age of 6 years are under parental care thereby prevented from sustaining severe injuries and the elasticity of bones makes them less prone to fracture. As the age progresses, they are more involved in physical activities such as fast and rash driving, interpersonal violence, alcohol abuse, contact sports, and so forth. The peak incidence is occurring between 30 and 35 years and least being in the age above 50 years. This is in conformity with Adi et al., [2] Bataineh, [19] Dongas and Hall, [25] Al Ahmed et al., [21] Brasileiro and Passeri. [22]

This study revealed that most of the fractures occur in a rural population (55%) compared to urban population (45%) may be due to lack of education leading to unawareness of traffic rules not wearing helmets and tying seat belts.

In this study, out of 225 subjects unilateral fractures were 110 (49%), bilateral fractures 23 (10.2%) and symphysis 18 (8%). Multiple fractures were 74 (32.9%) contrary to Iida et al. [27] and Yamamoto et al. [28] Among unilateral fractures right side were 76 (69%), and left side were 34 (31%). Of 18 symphysis fracture three cases had unilateral canine impaction, which was seen in OPG.


   Conclusion Top


We concluded from the foregoing study that the mandibular fractures were more common in males with the highest percentage in 30-35 years of age. RTA was the most common cause of fracture followed by falls, and the parasymphysis was the most common site. Among multiple mandible fractures, parasymphysis was most commonly associated with angle fractures. The fractures were seen more among the rural population hence there is a need to educate the rural population regarding road safety measures in specific and the whole city population in general. It is a need of the hour to educate the rural population regarding work ergonomics to prevent accidents and falls.

 
   References Top

1.Abiose BO. Maxillofacial skeleton injuries in the western states of Nigeria. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1986;24:31-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Adi M, Ogden GR, Chisholm DM. An analysis of mandibular fractures in Dundee, Scotland (1977 to 1985). Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;28:194-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Allan BP, Daly CG. Fractures of the mandible. A 35-year retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;19:268-71.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Azevedo AB, Trent RB, Ellis A. Population-based analysis of 10,766 hospitalizations for mandibular fractures in California, 1991 to 1993. J Trauma 1998;45:1084-7.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Freidl S, Bremerich A, Gellrich NC. Mandibular fractures. An epidemiological study of a 10-year cohort. Acta Stomatol Belg 1996;93:5-11.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Boole JR, Holtel M, Amoroso P, Yore M. 5196 mandible fractures among 4381 active duty army soldiers, 1980 to 1998. Laryngoscope 2001;111:1691-6.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Brook IM, Wood N. Aetiology and incidence of facial fractures in adults. Int J Oral Surg 1983;12:293-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Ellis E 3 rd , Moos KF, el-Attar A. Ten years of mandibular fractures: An analysis of 2,137 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1985;59:120-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.Scherer M, Sullivan WG, Smith DJ Jr, Phillips LG, Robson MC. An analysis of 1,423 facial fractures in 788 patients at an urban trauma center. J Trauma 1989;29:388-90.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.van Hoof RF, Merkx CA, Stekelenburg EC. The different patterns of fractures of the facial skeleton in four European countries. Int J Oral Surg 1977;6:3-11.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Kruger GO. Textbook of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 6 th ed. India: Jaypee Brothers; 1990.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Huelke DF. Mechanism in the production of mandibular fractures. J Oral Surg 1968;26:86-9.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.Akama MK, Chindia ML, Ndungu FL. Occurrence and pattern of mandibular fractures at Kisii District Hospital, Kenya. East Afr Med J 1993;70:732-3.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Rowe NL, William J. Maxillofacial Injuries. 2 nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1994. p. 216.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.Banks P, Brown A. Fractures of the Facial Skeleton. 2 nd ed. Oxford, Woburn: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2001. p. 171-85.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.Natu SS, Pradhan H, Gupta H, Alam S, Gupta S, Pradhan R, et al. An epidemiological study on pattern and incidence of mandibular fractures. Plast Surg Int 2012;2012.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.Olson RA, Fonseca RJ, Zeitler DL, Osbon DB. Fractures of the mandible: A review of 580 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1982;40:23-8.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Luce EA, Tubb TD, Moore AM. Review of 1,000 major facial fractures and associated injuries. Plast Reconstr Surg 1979;63:26-30.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Bataineh AB. Etiology and incidence of maxillofacial fractures in the north of Jordan. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1998;86:31-5.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.Shah A, Ali AS, Abdus S. Pattern and management of mandibular fractures: A study conducted on 264 patients. Pak Oral Dent J 2007;27:103-6.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.Al Ahmed HE, Jaber MA, Abu Fanas SH, Karas M. The pattern of maxillofacial fractures in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates: A review of 230 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2004;98:166-70.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.Brasileiro BF, Passeri LA. Epidemiological analysis of maxillofacial fractures in Brazil: A 5-year prospective study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;102:28-34.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.Imazawa T, Komuro Y, Inoue M, Yanai A. Mandibular fractures treated with maxillomandibular fixation screws (MMFS method). J Craniofac Surg 2006;17:544-9.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.Chuong R, Donoff RB, Guralnick WC. A retrospective analysis of 327 mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1983;41:305-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Dongas P, Hall GM. Mandibular fracture patterns in Tasmania, Australia. Aust Dent J 2002;47:131-7.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.Ogundare BO, Bonnick A, Bayley N. Pattern of mandibular fractures in an urban major trauma center. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:713-8.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.Iida S, Kogo M, Sugiura T, Mima T, Matsuya T. Retrospective analysis of 1502 patients with facial fractures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;30:286-90.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.Yamamoto K, Kuraki M, Kurihara M, Matsusue Y, Murakami K, Horita S, et al. Maxillofacial fractures resulting from falls. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:1602-7.  Back to cited text no. 28
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]


This article has been cited by
1 State of the art in the treatment of mandibular fractures caused by firearms: case report
Erasmo Freitas de SOUZA JÚNIOR,Hécio Henrique Araújo de MORAIS,Eudes Euler de Souza LUCENA,José Rodolfo Lopes de Paiva CAVALCANTI,Fausto Pierdoná GUZEN,Dayane Pessoa de ARAÚJO,Jimmy Charles Melo BARBALHO
RGO - Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia. 2018; 66(1): 88
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Comparison between three methods for internal bone fixations in displaced mandibular angle fractures
Abdel Aziz B. Abdullah Baiomy,Abdelbadia A. Abdelmabood
Egyptian Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery. 2017; 8(3): 70
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 The enhancement of osteogenic capacity in a synthetic BMP-2 derived peptide coated mineralized collagen composite in the treatment of the mandibular defects
Lei Zhang,Weidong Mu,Shuangfeng Chen,Dawei Yang,Fei Xu,Yaping Wu
Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering. 2016; 27(5): 495
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Comparison of three-dimensional plate versus double miniplate osteosynthesis for treatment of unfavorable mandibular angle fractures
N.H. Al-Tairi,M.M. Shoushan,M.M. Saad Khedr,S.E. Abd-alal
Tanta Dental Journal. 2015;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Incidence and pattern of mandibular fractures in Rohilkhand region, Uttar Pradesh state, India: A retrospective study
Kolli Yada Giri,Aishwarya Pratap Singh,Ramakant Dandriyal,Niranjanaprasad Indra,Sanjay Rastogi,Sunil Kumar Mall,Shouvik Chowdhury,Himanshu Pratap Singh
Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research. 2015; 5(3): 140
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1798    
    Printed19    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded232    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal