Sanino ZI, Carrazana DM, Fuentes FD, Guzmán AV, Quitral AR

Language: English
References: 16
Page: 113-122
PDF size: 427.43 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Mandibular fractures have a high prevalence in the maxillofacial region, often requiring surgical intervention. The gold standard for treatment involves open reduction with osteosynthesis using titanium plates. New biocompatible materials have been applied to address the complications and disadvantages of titanium plates, leading to the emergence of absorbable osteosynthesis plates. Understanding the effectiveness of titanium plates and absorbable osteosynthesis plates in the treatment of mandibular fractures helps determine the need to invest in new techniques with predictable outcomes. To describe the effectiveness of using titanium plates and absorbable osteosynthesis plates in the treatment of mandibular fractures. In August 2023, an exploratory systematic review of the available literature since 2018 on the use of absorbable osteosynthesis plates in mandibular fractures was conducted. PubMed, Scopus, and WOS were searched, including studies in English or Spanish. A total of 227 articles were obtained. After reviewing titles and abstracts, 29 articles were included for full-text reading. Nine duplicates were discarded, and 10 were excluded based on predefined criteria, resulting in a total of 10 articles for this study. Authors report that titanium plates exhibit less displacement of the contact surface in fractured segments due to a larger surface area, rigidity, and load-bearing capacity. Absorbable osteosynthesis plates are more flexible but are susceptible to greater deformation under significant masticatory forces, potentially leading to fracture opening and displacement of bone segments. Postoperative complications were analyzed, and no statistically significant differences were found. Titanium and absorbable devices did not differ in terms of biomechanical behavior and postoperative complications in the treatment of mandibular fractures. Further studies comparing both types of plates in mandibular fractures are needed.

REFERENCES

1. Zapata S., Pacheco C., Núñez C., Gazitúa G., Cerda P. Epidemiología de las fracturas mandibulares tratadas quirúrgicamente en el Instituto Traumatológico de Santiago (Chile): 10 años de revisión. Rev Esp Cir Oral Maxilofac [Internet]. 2015; 37 (3): 138-43. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.maxilo.2013.09.001

2. Quitral Argandoña R., Sanino Zavala I., Diaz González J.C., Diaz Sotomayor F., Olivares Unamuno I., Nasi Toso M. Perfil epidemiológico de pacientes con fractura mandibular tratadas quirúrgicamente en el Hospital Gustavo Fricke, Chile, entre los años 2014 y 2020. Rev Esp Cir Oral Maxilofac [Internet]. 2023; 44. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.20986/recom.2023.1328/2021

3. Bohluli B., Mohammadi E., Oskui I.Z., Moharamnejad N. Treatment of mandibular angle fracture: Revision of the basic principles. Chin J Traumatol [Internet]. 2019; 22 (2): 117-9. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2019.01.005

4. Cural Ü., Atalay B., Yildirim M.S. Comparison of mechanical stabilization of the mandibular Angulus fracture fixation, with titanium plates and screws, resorbable plates and screws, and bone adhesives. J Craniofac Surg [Internet]. 2018; 29 (7): 1780-7. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000004866

5. Leno M.B., Liu S.Y., Chen C.-T., Liao H.-T. Comparison of functional outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction between titanium and absorbable plates and screws for fixation of mandibular fractures: A one-year prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg[Internet]. 2017; 45 (5): 704-9. Disponible en:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.01.034

6. Burns B., Fields J.-M., Farinas A., PollinsA., Perdikis G., Thayer W. Comparingmaximal forces in resorbable poly-L-lacticacid and titanium plates for mandibularfracture fixation. Heliyon [Internet]. 2020;6 (4): e03705. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03705

7. Costa D.L., Torres A.M., Bergamaschi I.P.,Kluppel L.E., de Oliveira R.B., Weber J.B.B.Assessment of resorbable and non-resorbablefixation systems in sagittal split ramus osteotomy:An in vitro study. J Maxillofac OralSurg [Internet]. 2022; 21 (3): 779-84. Disponibleen: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12663-021-01581-6

8. Zieliński R., Kozakiewicz M., Świniarski J.Comparison of titanium and bioresorbableplates in “A” shape plate properties-finiteelement analysis. Materials (Basel) [Internet].2019; 12 (7): 1110. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma12071110

9. Pontell M.E., Niklinska E.B., Braun S.A., JaegerN., Kelly K.J., Golinko M.S. Resorbable versustitanium rigid fixation for pediatric mandibularfractures: A systematic review, institutionalexperience and comparative analysis. CraniomaxillofacTrauma Reconstr [Internet]. 2022;15 (3): 189-200. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/19433875211022573

10. Chocron Y., Azzi A.J., Cugno S. Resorbableimplants for mandibular fracture fixation: Asystematic review and meta-analysis. PlastReconstr Surg Glob Open [Internet]. 2019;7 (8): e2384. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/gox.0000000000002384

11. Sukegawa S., Yamamoto N., Nakano K.,Takabatake K., Kawai H., Kanno T., et al.Biomechanical loading comparison betweentitanium and bioactive resorbable screwsystems for fixation of intracapsular condylarhead fractures. Materials (Basel) [Internet].2020; 13 (14): 3153. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13143153

12. Sukegawa S., Kanno T., Yamamoto N.,Nakano K., Takabatake K., Kawai H., et al.Biomechanical loading comparison betweentitanium and unsintered hydroxyapatite/poly-L-lactide plate system for fixation of mandibularsubcondylar fractures. Materials (Basel)[Internet]. 2019; 12 (9): 1557. Disponible en:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma12091557

13. Dogru S.C., Cansiz E., Arslan Y.Z. Biomechanicalevaluation of resorbable and titaniumminiplates and of single and double miniplatesfor the treatment of mandibular condylefractures. Biocybern Biomed Eng [Internet].2019; 39 (3): 709-18. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.2019.04.006

14. Park Y.-W., Kang H.-S., Lee J.-H. Comparativestudy on long-term stability in mandibularsagittal split ramus osteotomy: hydroxyapatite/poly-l-lactide mesh versus titaniumminiplate. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg[Internet]. 2019; 41 (1). Disponible en:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40902-019-0192-6

15. Ulu M., Soylu E., Kelebek S., Dikici S., OflazH. Comparative study of biomechanicalstability of resorbable and titanium fixationsystems after sagittal split ramus osteotomywith a novel designed in-vitro testing unit. JCraniomaxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2018; 46(2): 299-304. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.11.024

16. Kim D.-Y., Sung I.-Y., Cho Y.-C., ParkE.-J., Son J.-H. Bioabsorbable plates versusmetal miniplate systems for use in endoscope-assisted open reduction and internalfixation of mandibular subcondylar fractures.J Craniomaxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2018;46 (3): 413-7. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.12.026