This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Facial Plastic Surgery  • Trauma/ Maxillofacial Surgery  • Oral/ Maxillofacial Trauma  • Alert me on articles by topic

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130:1230-1231.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

One cannot discuss the management of subcondylar fractures of the mandible without addressing the controversy dividing experts in the field of maxillofacial trauma. In fact, the debate about open vs closed management of these injuries figured prominently in an issue of the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. ^1-2

That being said, I must compliment Vural for so succinctly summarizing such a complex subject. The author's personal approach is not inconsistent with the literature review that he provides, but it presupposes the maxillomandibular fixation (MMF), particularly the rigid MMF, to be an appropriate treatment option. Over the past decade, the trend has been toward shorter and shorter periods of immobilization and earlier initiation of functional rehabilitat training elastic traction, exercises, and physiotherapy. The current opinion among some very experienced surgeons³ is that the rigid MMF has no place in the management of subcondylar fractures, since it does little more than delay . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Robert M. Kellman, MD

RELATED ARTICLES

Treatment of Adult Subcondylar Mandibular Fractures: Closed vs Open vs Endoscopic Approach
Emre Vural
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(10):1228-1230.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Considerations in Subcondylar Fracture Management
Michael Miloro
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(10):1231-1232.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT