12.07.2014 Views

Download e-copy - Smile Dental Journal

Download e-copy - Smile Dental Journal

Download e-copy - Smile Dental Journal

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Introduction<br />

Zygomatic or Malar bone fractures are (2 nd most<br />

common) after nasal bone fractures among facial<br />

skeletal Injures. 1,2 The high incidence of these fractures<br />

may probably be attributed to the fact that Zygoma’s<br />

occupy an anatomically prominent position within the<br />

facial skeleton which frequently exposes it to traumatic<br />

forces. The prominent convex shape of the zygoma<br />

makes it vulnerable to traumatic injury. Even minimally<br />

displaced zygomatic-complex fractures can result in<br />

functional and aesthetic deformities. All traumas to the<br />

face, particularly above the level of the mouth, require<br />

a careful ocular examination including an estimation<br />

of visual acuity of each eye, and zygomatic-complex<br />

fractures are frequently complicated by injury to the orbit<br />

and eye adnexae, which are the most serious negative<br />

outcomes of zygomatic complex fractures. 3<br />

Patients and Methods<br />

Information for the study was gathered from patient<br />

records and a self-administrated patient questionnaire<br />

over a period of six months from 10-1-2005 to 20-<br />

7-2005. Fifty patients, who had sustained zygomaticcomplex<br />

fractures were examined clinically, radiographicaly,<br />

and also underwent orthoptic investigations.<br />

A written informed consent was obtained from the<br />

patient or attendant. The treatment of fractures was done<br />

by standard methods of reduction and fixation. Data<br />

was analyzed in statistical program for social sciences<br />

(SPSS) version 11.0. The frequency and percentage<br />

was computed for qualitative variables, like gender,<br />

etiologies, pattern and management modalities. Mean±<br />

standard deviation was computed for qualitative<br />

Variables, like age. Ethical approval was gained from the<br />

local research ethics.<br />

Results<br />

The results of this study were described in sequence of<br />

the objectives. Detailed description of separate results is<br />

shown in figures and tables.<br />

Discussion<br />

The zygomatic complex gives the cheek prominence, and<br />

it is the second most common mid-facial bone fractured<br />

after the nasal bone and, overall, represents 13% of<br />

craniofacial fractures. 4 Zygomatic complex fractures are<br />

almost always associated with fractures of the floor of the<br />

orbit. Typically, a fracture line extends from the inferior<br />

orbital fissure antero-medially along the orbital process<br />

of the maxilla, toward the infra-orbital rim.<br />

Fifty patients attended with zygomatic complex fractures<br />

over a six months period. The age of the patients ranged<br />

from 17 to 75 years. Seventy six percent of patients were<br />

male, and the mean and median ages were (32.3; 30.5)<br />

for males, and (33.4; 30.5) for females respectively. The<br />

male to female ratio was 3:1 as shown in table 1.<br />

Age<br />

Range<br />

Number<br />

of patient<br />

Male Female Total<br />

%<br />

Number<br />

of patient<br />

Assault was the major cause of zygomatic complex<br />

fractures, (35 patients [70%]), and the second most<br />

common cause was sport (8 patients [16%]). The<br />

majority of assault cases were in the 24-28 age groups.<br />

This corresponds with results in comparable studies 5-8 as<br />

shown in figure 1.<br />

Of the patients who required surgical intervention,<br />

8 (16%) were treated within 4-7 days and 19 (38%)<br />

in 8-13 days. In 23 patients (46%) surgery was not<br />

undertaken until 14 days. The reasons for this may<br />

include allowing the oedema and ecchymosis to settle<br />

and for the general condition of the patients to improve 9<br />

as shown in figure 2.<br />

We also evaluated the site of injury to whether it was<br />

left-side or right, and compared this to aetiology of the<br />

fracture. There was a statistically significant difference<br />

between aetiologies and sites of injuries with left side<br />

%<br />

Total<br />

number of<br />

patient<br />

14-18 4 8 0 0 4 8<br />

19-23 2 4 2 4 4 8<br />

24-28 12 24 4 8 16 32<br />

29-33 5 10 1 2 6 12<br />

34-38 6 12 2 4 8 16<br />

39-43 4 8 1 2 5 10<br />

44-48 3 6 0 0 3 6<br />

Over<br />

48<br />

2 4 2 4 4 8<br />

Total 38 76 12 24 50 100<br />

(Table 1) Age and sex of study group<br />

16<br />

14<br />

12<br />

10<br />

8<br />

6<br />

4<br />

2<br />

0<br />

14-18<br />

19-23<br />

24-28<br />

29-33<br />

34-38<br />

39-43<br />

(Fig. 1) Aetiology by age distribution<br />

44-48<br />

Over 48<br />

%<br />

Total<br />

Others<br />

Industrial<br />

Road Trafic<br />

Accident<br />

Sport<br />

Fall<br />

Assault<br />

<strong>Smile</strong> <strong>Dental</strong> <strong>Journal</strong> | Volume 6, Issue 4 - 2011| 33 |

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!