Transoral vs. extraoral approach in the treatment of condylar neck fractures.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess a non-endoscopic transoral versus extraoral technique in the open reduction and internal fixation of displaced or dislocated fractures of the condylar neck.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

A total of 104 patients, treated from 2007 to 2012 with 114 class II or class IV fractures according to Spiessl and Schroll were included in this study. Facial nerve function, scarring, pain and functional clinical parameters, such as protrusion, mediotrusion and maximum interincisal distance, were judged clinically (at 21 ± 12.1 months); repositioning and reossification were measured upon preoperative, postoperative and follow-up (at 8.8 ± 7 months) radiographs. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the OHIP-G 14 questionnaire.

RESULTS

In all, 36 patients (35%) with 43 fractures (38%) presented for clinical follow-up. Both treatment groups showed clinically and radiologically comparable results. Scarring was obvious in all extraorally treated patients, and hypertrophic scars occurred in four class IV cases (24%). One class IV patient (6%) had a persistent facial nerve palsy; temporary pareses were more frequent (n = 4; 24%).

CONCLUSION

The transoral approach did not jeopardize facial nerve function, and extraoral scars were avoided. Repositioning and fixation results and the frequency of revision operations were comparable. The transoral approach can be recommended generally in class II and class IV cases.