Archives of Craniofacial Surgery (대한두개안면성형외과학회지)

Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association (대한두개안면성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Three-dimensional analysis of facial asymmetry after zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture reduction: a retrospective analysis of 101 East Asian patients

  • Cho, Jakwang (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Youngjun (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Youngwoong (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Sanggye Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2021.06.08
  • Accepted : 2021.06.20
  • Published : 2021.06.20
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) has a protruded, convex shape and plays a vital role in determining the contour by affecting the width of the middle face. This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of ZMC fracture reduction and explore detailed directions for outcome improvement. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients diagnosed with unilateral ZMC fracture who underwent ZMC reduction surgery at a single hospital between January 2015 and May 2020. The primary outcome variable was facial asymmetry using the difference in the bilateral malar eminence (ME) position measured by computed tomography scan. The 3-dimensional distance (IA, asymmetry index) and the distance in each dimension, Dx (anteroposterior distance), Dy (mediolateral distance), and Dz (superoinferior distance) were compared. Results: A total of 101 patients with ZMC fractures and 54 non-fracture patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the study sample was 43.49 years (control sample, 43.35 years), and the male-to-female ratio was 66.3:33.7 (control sample, 64.8:35.2). There were 53 and 48 patients with right and left ZMC fractures, respectively. The IA was not statistically different between the two groups. In terms of position in each dimension, only Dx was significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion: The results show that overall facial asymmetry was recovered after ZMC reduction, but in certain dimension significant difference in ME position has still remained. For further improvement, treatment should be performed to relieve malar depression in the anteroposterior dimension.

Keywords

References

  1. Strong EB, Gary C. Management of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017;25:547-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsc.2017.06.006
  2. Khaqani MS, Tavosi F, Gholami M, Eftekharian HR, Khojastepour L. Analysis of facial symmetry after zygomatic bone fracture management. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;76:595-604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2017.10.005
  3. Yoon T, Choi Y, Cho J, Kim Y, Nam S. Primary infraorbital foramen decompression for the zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture: is it essential? J Craniofac Surg 2016;27:61-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002255
  4. Hong WT, Choi JH, Kim JH, Kim YH, Yang CE, Kim J, et al. Trigeminal somatosensory evoked potential test as an evaluation tool for infraorbital nerve damage. Arch Craniofac Surg 2019;20:223-7. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2019.00234
  5. van den Bergh B, Karagozoglu KH, Heymans MW, Forouzanfar T. Aetiology and incidence of maxillofacial trauma in Amsterdam: a retrospective analysis of 579 patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2012;40:e165-9.
  6. Chen T, Hsu Y, Li J, Hu J, Khadka A, Wang Q, et al. Correction of zygoma and zygomatic arch protrusion in East Asian individuals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;112:307-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.10.026
  7. Zou C, Niu F, Liu J, Chen Y, Wang M, Su R, et al. Midface contour change after reduction malarplasty with a modified L-shaped osteotomy: a surgical outcomes study. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2014;38:177-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-013-0239-5
  8. Jirawatnotai S, Sriswadpong P. The difference in the location of the malar summit between genders in Southeast Asians with appropriate references. Arch Craniofac Surg 2021;22:78-84. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2020.00423
  9. Onizuka T, Watanabe K, Takasu K, Keyama A. Reduction malar plasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1983;7:121-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01571117
  10. Lee YJ, Lee IS, Yang HJ. Reduction malarplasty combined with facelift via the prezygomatic space. Arch Aesthetic Plast Surg 2020;26:138-43. https://doi.org/10.14730/aaps.2020.02215
  11. Gaziri DA, Omizollo G, Luchi GH, de Oliveira MG, Heitz C. Assessment for treatment of tripod fractures of the zygoma with microcompressive screws. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012; 70:e378-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2012.02.009
  12. Kim DH, Kim RH, Lee J, Chee YD, Kwon KH. Evaluation of soft tissue asymmetry using cone-beam computed tomography after open reduction and internal fixation of zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;40:103-10. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2014.40.3.103
  13. Mao SH, Hsieh YH, Chou PY, Shyu VB, Chen CT, Chen CH. Quantitative determination of zygomaticomaxillary complex position based on computed tomographic imaging. Ann Plast Surg 2016;76 Suppl 1:S117-20. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000000703
  14. Mendelson B, Wong CH. Changes in the facial skeleton with aging: implications and clinical applications in facial rejuvenation. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2012;36:753-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-012-9904-3
  15. Ji SY, Kim SS, Kim MH, Yang WS. Surgical methods of zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture. Arch Craniofac Surg 2016; 17:206-10. https://doi.org/10.7181/acfs.2016.17.4.206
  16. Bevans SE, Moe KS. Advances in the reconstruction of orbital fractures. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2017;25:513-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsc.2017.06.014
  17. Pau CY, Barrera JE, Kwon J, Most SP. Three-dimensional analysis of zygomatic-maxillary complex fracture patterns. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2010;3:167-76. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1263082
  18. Ras F, Habets LL, van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Method for quantifying facial asymmetry in three dimensions using stereophotogrammetry. Angle Orthod 1995;65:233-9.
  19. Rudderman RH, Mullen RL. Biomechanics of the facial skeleton. Clin Plast Surg 1992;19:11-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-1298(20)30893-2
  20. Nasr WF, ElSheikh E, El-Anwar MW, Sweed AH, Bessar A, Ezzeldin N. Two-versus three-point internal fixation of displaced zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2018;11:256-64. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1604199
  21. Mahmood HN, Rahim AU, Khan WU. Outcome of treatment of zygomatic bone fracture by two point fixation versus three point fixation in Mayo Hospital Lahore. J Pak Med Assoc 2019; 69:1623-7.
  22. Degala S, Radhakrishna S, Dharmarajan S. Zygomaticomaxillary fracture fixation: a prospective comparative evaluation of two-point versus three-point fixation. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2021;25:41-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-020-00881-4