• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.3-6
• /
• 2020

Nowadays, the incidence of nasal bone fracture is increasing because of social complexity with frequent social activity, and reduction of fractures is relatively simple and can be corrected in short operation time. However, the postoperative results are known to be less satisfied with higher complication rates relatively. These problems could have resulted from inaccurate recognition and interpretation of fracture aspect, inaccurate planning of operation resulting in under or overcorrection, ignoring septal management, complication related nasal packings with removal, postoperative management, and patient satisfaction with complication.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.12-16
• /
• 2008

Purpose: Closed reduction is most common treatment method for nasal bone fracture but it requires secondary correction operation commonly. For preventing secondary revision, we applied ultrasonography during closed reduction of nasal bone fracture and examined the result of operation. Methods: 80 patients were sorted into 2 groups, ultrasound-guided closed reduction group(n=40) and manual closed reduction group(n=40). We classified the unilateral fracture involving lower 1/2 of nasal bone into type I, the bilateral fracture involving lower 1/2 of nasal bone into type III and the fracture of upper 1/2 of nasal bone into type III. The occurrence rate of overcorrection and undercorrection were evaluated by comparing preoperative and postoperative MDCT(Multi Direction Computed Tomography). Results: In manual closed reduction group, overcorrection were found in 4 patients and undercorrection were found in 3 patients. In ultrasound-guided closed reduction group, overcorrection was not observed and undercorrection was observed in 2 patients. Conclusion: Intraoperative ultrasound evaluation of nasal bone fracture resulted in reduced occurrence rate of secondary nasal deformities, showed easier detection of the fractured site and have superiority upon simple physical examination or simple x-ray.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.1-2
• /
• 2018

Theoretically, panfacial bone fractures involve all three areas of the face: frontal bone, midface, and mandible. In practice, when two out of these three areas are involved, the term "panfacial bone fracture" has been applied. We can use physical examination, simple radiologic examination, and computed tomography study for diagnosis. Linear fracture are treated by conservative treatment. But, most of panfacial bone fracture patients need to be treated by open reduction and internal fixation. Facial width is most important thing that we need to care during operation. There are many ways about sequence like "top to bottom," "bottom to top," "outside to inside," or "inside to outside" and the authors prefer "top to bottom" and "outside to inside" ways. The authors apply arch bar from the first of surgery and then, set frontal bone fracture, midface fracture and mandible fracture in sequence. Usually, we remove the stitches for 5 days after surgery and the intraoral stitch removed after 2 weeks. Usually arch bar is going to be removed 4 weeks after surgery. We could get acceptable results with the above way.

• Korean Journal of Cleft Lip And Palate
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.49-58
• /
• 2017

We report the rehabilitation of Class II malocclusion with multiple teeth fracture due to trauma. A multidisciplinary team approach was necessary to treat patient's problems such as bone fracture, malocclusion, and multiple teeth fracture. Emergency conservative treatment, orthodontic treatment and prosthetic restoration successfully restored the occlusion. However, special considerations were needed along the orthodontic treatment process due to the unexpected complications such as ankylosis, root resorption and detection of additional teeth fractures.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.181-185
• /
• 2016

Panfacial bone fracture is challenging. Even experienced surgeons find restoration of original facial architecture difficult because of the severe degree of fragmentation and loss of reference segments that could guide the start of facial reconstruction. To restore the facial contour, surgeons usually follow a general sequence for panfacial bone reduction. Among the sequences, the bottom-to-top and outside-in sequence is reported to be the most widely used in recent publications. However, a single sequence cannot be applied to all cases of panfacial fractures because of the variations in panfacial bone fracture patterns. In this article, we intend to find the reference and discuss the efficacy of inside-out sequence in facial bone fracture reconstruction.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.270-274
• /
• 2018

Background: Nasal bone fractures occur frequently because the nasal bone is located at the forefront of the face. The goal of this study was to examine the cause, change in severity, change in incidence, and demographics of nasal bone fracture according to today's lifestyle. Methods: A total of 2,092 patients diagnosed as having nasal bone fractures at our department between 2002 and 2017 were included in this study. We retrospectively examined patients' medical records to extract information regarding age, sex, cause of injury, combined facial bone fractures, and related injuries such as skull base fracture, spinal cord injury, brain hemorrhage, and other bone fractures. Fracture severity was classified by nasal bone fracture type. Results: No statistically significant difference was found in annual number of patients treated for nasal bone fracture. The proportion of patients who underwent closed reduction was significantly decreased over time for those with nasal bone fractures caused by traffic accidents. However, it was not significantly changed for those with nasal bone fractures due to other causes. The number of patients with combined facial bone fractures increased over time. Incidences of severe nasal bone fracture also increased over time. Conclusion: The study suggested that there is a decrease in the frequency and increase in the severity of nasal bone fracture due to traffic accident. Many protective devices prevent nasal bone fractures caused by a small amount of external force; however, these devices are not effective against higher amounts of external force. This study highlights the importance of preoperative thorough evaluation to manage patients with nasal bone fractures due to traffic accident.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.324-328
• /
• 2019

Intraorbital infection shows a low incidence, but it might cause blindness or even death. This case is unusual in that its origin from a craniofacial bone fracture prior to infection of the maxillary sinus. A 33-year-old female patient was referred for right cheek swelling. When she visited the emergency room, we removed right cheek hematoma and bacterial examination was done. In the past, she had craniofacial bone surgical history due to a traffic accident 6 years ago. Next day, the swelling had remained with proptosis and pus was recognized in the conjunctiva. We planned an emergency operation and removed the pus which was already spread inside the orbit. And the evaluation for sinusitis was consulted to the otorhinolaryngology department simultaneously. There were Prevotella oralis and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis bacterial infection in the intraorbital and sinus respectively. Afterwards, the vigorous dressing was done for over a month with intravenous antibiotics. Though the intraorbital infection was resolved, blindness and extraocular movement limitation were inevitable. In conclusion, close follow up of the maxillary sinus in facial bone fracture patients is important and aggressive treatment is needed when an infection is diagnosed.

• Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• /
• v.40
• /
• pp.29.1-29.11
• /
• 2018

Background: For proper recovery from craniofacial fracture, it is necessary to establish guidelines based on trends. This study aimed to analyze the patterns and causes of craniofacial fractures. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent surgery for craniofacial fractures between 2010 and 2017 at a single center. Several parameters, including time of injury, region and cause of fracture, alcohol intoxication, time from injury to surgery, hospitalization period, and postoperative complications, were evaluated. Results: This study analyzed 2708 fracture lesions of 2076 patients, among whom males aged 10 to 39 years were the most numerous. The number of patients was significantly higher in the middle of a month. The most common fractures were a nasal bone fracture. The most common causes of fracture were ground accidents and personal assault, which tended to frequently cause more nasal bone fracture than other fractures. Traffic accidents and high falls tended to cause zygomatic arch and maxillary wall fractures more frequently. Postoperative complications-observed in 126 patients-had a significant relationship with the end of a month, mandible or panfacial fracture, and traffic accidents. Conclusions: The present findings on long-term craniofacial fracture trends should be considered by clinicians dealing with fractures and could be useful for policy decisions.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.119-124
• /
• 2012

Purpose: Closed reduction and nasal packings for 3-7 days is usual procedures in managing nasal bone fracture. Most patients experience several discomfort owing to lack of nasal breathing. There are many reports concerning how to reduce patient's discomforts or complications. But it is obvious that the duration of nasal packing is 3-7 days. The aim of this study is evaluate the effect of half day nasal packing in results of nasal bone fracture. Methods: The study was performed on 97 nasal bone fracture patients who had simple nasal bone fractures from January to June 2012. The incidence, cause, patient's discomfort and satisfaction with half day nasal packing are analyzed according to patient's medical records and questionnaire at each nasal packing removal, postoperative 4 weeks. Results: Young male patients, especially the teenagers and the twenties were the common age group, and physical violence was most common cause of injury. A total of 78 out of 97 patients were male. In 92 cases, closed reduction were applied. Approximately, 87% of the patients were satisfied with the outcomes. Conclusion: Half day nasal packing is considered as an effective method to minimize patient's discomfort owing to prolonged absence of nasal breathing with maintenance of stability.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.104-110
• /
• 2012

Purpose: Who may dare to state that optimal choice of treating nasal bone fracture is closed reduction? Few decades of authors' experience in nasal bone fracture has lead to believe that more active and assertive approach in nasal bone fracture by performing simultaneous lateral osteotomy may be applied in proper indications to acquire more accurate reduction and cosmetically satisfying result. Methods: From May 2008 to October 2009, among 241 nasal bone fracture patients, 20 patients underwent simultaneous lateral osteotomy with nasal bone fracture reduction. Followed by rigid septal correction, nasal cavity is packed to stabilize the fracture segment for safer osteotomy. Through intranasal incision, in selected cases of difficult reduction or for cosmetic purposes, various types of lateral osteotomy was performed corresponding to the fracture anatomy, conditions of the nasal cavity. Postoperative nasal packing was retained for one week and nasal dorsum splint for 3 weeks. Results: Lateral osteotomy was utilized for difficult cases of closed reduction, for correction of wide nose, hump and deviation in 9, 5, 2, and 4 cases, respectively. Patient satisfaction was scaled 90% in satisfaction and moderate in 10% (2 cases), complaining of mild nasal tip deviation. Physicians detected 2 cases of apparent deformity with patient recognition; one patient with mild step deformity at the osteotomy site and the other patient with minimal implant mobility. Conclusion: By accompanying profound understanding of the fracture anatomy, more active and assertive approach in nasal fracture reduction can be coincide with simultaneous lateral osteotomy to reduce the rate of secondary deformity and to obtain more cosmetically satisfying result.