1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Journal of Emergency Medicine, Trauma and Acute Care
  4. Volume 2025, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 2025, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1999-7086
  • EISSN: 1999-7094

Abstract

To compare the efficacy of retromandibular approach (RM) to transmasseteric anteroparotid approach (TMAP) in open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular condylar fractures using various clinical parameters. The parameters evaluated include duration (time taken from incision to reach the fractured site, accessibility to reach the fractured site (intraoperative), facial nerve palsy, sialocele, and scarring (post-operative).

The sample size was 26 (13 per group). The study was conducted in patients with condylar fractures planned for open reduction and internal fixation. The choice of approaches was RM and TMAP. The post-operative parameters were analyzed during the first week, first month, and third month. The study was done between 2018 and 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to the groups. Group I contained RM and Group II had TMAP.

On comparing efficacy, each approach was versatile in its own way. Considering duration no statistically significant difference was observed. In terms of accessibility there was no statistically significant difference but TMAP offered a better access compared to RM. A very minimal difference was observed in post-operative features like facial nerve palsy, sialocele, and scarring but none reached statistical significance. Only scaring pertaining to the length of the incision in TMAP was statistically significant. Considering RM, it was the fastest, easiest to reach the fractured site and more suitable for reducing medially displaced condyle fractures. TMAP credits with respect to direct access to the fracture site, placement of screws perpendicular to the fractured site, less chance of facial nerve palsy but resulted in inconspicuous scar. It was observed that both approaches had their own versatility, including good exposure and accessibility to fracture site. The choice depends on the type of condyle fracture and convenience of the surgeon.

Currently, very little has been published pertaining to the comparison between RM and TMAP for condyle fractures. RM resulted in less scarring, providing a better convenience and accessibility for reducing medially displaced subcondyle fracture. TMAP offered a more direct exposure of the fracture site with a better direct reduction, ease of placement of plate and screws with a favorable access.

© 2025 Punnen, Thomas, Prathap, Udayakumar, Rajan, licensee HBKU Press.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2025.16
2025-04-08
2025-04-16
The full text of this item is not currently available.

References

  1. Fonseca RJDMD, Fonseca RJ, Dexter Barber H, Powers MP, Frost DE. 2005. Oral and Maxillofacial Trauma, Volume 1:, Third edition, W.B. Saunders Company, p. 291.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Handschel J, Rüggeberg T, Depprich R, et al. Comparison of various approaches for the treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar process. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012; 40:(8):e397–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2012.02.012
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Banks P, Brown A. 2001. Fractures of Facial Skeleton, p. 10. LondonJohn Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Valiati R, Ibrahim D, Abreu MER, et al. The treatment of condylar fractures: to open or not to open? A critical review of this controversy. Int J Med Sci. 2008; 5:(6):313–8. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.5.313
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Kshirsagar R, Singh V, Pawar S, Shah R. Retromandibular approach in the management of condylar fractures by open reduction and internal fixation a prospective study. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2015; 6:(2):180–4. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-5950.183852
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Narayanan V, Ramadorai A, Ravi P, Nirvikalpa N. Transmasseteric anterior parotid approach for condylar fractures: experience of 129 cases. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 50:(5):420–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2011.09.008
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Parihar VS, Bandyopadhyay TK, Chattopadhyay PK, Jacob SM. Retromandibular transparotid approach compared with transmasseteric anterior parotid approach for the management of fractures of the mandibular condylar process: a prospective randomised study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019; 57:(9):880–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2019.07.010
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Manasali M, Amin M, Aghabeigi B, Newman L. Retromandibular approach to the mandibular condyle: a clinical and cadaveric study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 32:(3):253–6.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Narayanan V, Kannan R, Sreekumar K. Retromandibular approach for reduction and fixation of mandibular condylar fractures: a clinical experience. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 38:(8):835–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2009.04.008
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Bouchard C, Perreault M-H. Postoperative complications associated with the retromandibular approach: a retrospective analysis of 118 subcondylar fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 72:(2):370–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2013.08.014
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Qian Y, Wang W, Xu B, Zou Z, Yang C, Shao S. Transmasseteric anterior parotid approach for treatment of mandibular subcondylar fractures. J Craniofac Surg. 2018; 29:(7):e690–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000004922
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Mohamad AM. Transmasseteric anteroparotid approach for mandibular condylar fractures- merits and demerits. Egypt J Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011; 35:(2):227-e232.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Kumaran S, Thambiah LJ. Analysis of two different surgical approaches for fractures of the mandibular condyle. Indian J Dent Res. 2012; 23:(4):463–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9290.104950
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Chae JK, Kim JH, Kim EJ, Park K. Values of a patient and observer scar assessment scale to evaluate the facial skin graft scar. Ann Dermatol. 2016; 28:(5):615–23. https://doi.org/10.5021/ad.2016.28.5.615
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Shi J, Yuan H, Xu B. Treatment of mandibular condyle fractures using a modified transparotid approach via the parotid mini-incision: experience with 31 cases. PLoS One. 2013; 8:(12):e83525. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083525
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Wilson AW, Ethunandan M, Brennan PA. Transmasseteric antero-parotid approach for open reduction and internal fixation of condylar fractures. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005; 43:(1):57–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2004.09.011
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Mohan AP, Jeevan Kumar KA, Venkatesh V, Pavan Kumar B, Patil K. Comparison of preauricular approach versus retromandibular approach in management of condylar fractures. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2012; 11:(4):435–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-012-0350-1
     [Google Scholar]
  18. El-Sabbagh A, Mahgoub M, Abd El-Latif E, Elhadidy M. Condylar fractures: Review of 40 cases. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 8:(1):19. https://doi.org/10.4103/ams.ams_133_17
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Mansuri Z, Dhuvad J, Anchlia S, Bhatt U, Rajpoot D, Patel H. Comparison of three different approaches in treatment of mandibular condylar fractures – Our experience. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2023; 14:(2):256–63. https://doi.org/10.4103/njms.njms_485_21
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Chowdhury E, Ebenezer V, Balakrishnan R. Retromandibular transparotid approach vs transmasseteric anteroparotid approach in treatment of mandibular condylar fractures – A literature review. J Pharm Sci Res. 2023; 15:(3):1044–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2019.07.010
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gilliland J, Ritto F, Tiwana P. Complications of the transmasseteric anteroparotid approach for subcondylar fractures: A retrospective study. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2022; 15:(1):66–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/19433875211016923
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2025.16
Loading
Comparison between retromandibular approach versus transmasseteric anteroparotid approach in open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular condylar fractures—A prospective observational study
Journal of Emergency Medicine, Trauma and Acute Care 2025, 16 (2025); https://doi.org/10.5339/jemtac.2025.16
/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2025.16
/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2025.16
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Condyle fractures, facial nerve paralysis, retromandibular approach and transmasseteric anteroparotid approach

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error