ArticleAnnals of maxillofacial surgery
Evaluation of Panfacial Fractures in a German Supraregional Trauma Center between 2015 and 2017 - A Retrospective Study.
Article in Annals of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Value of Initial CT Imaging for Surgical Planning and Outcomes in Panfacial Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026Review
- Trauma-related retrobulbar hematoma: predictive risk factors and clinical outcome in 52 cases.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Long-term evaluation of complications after osteosynthesis of the jaws in patients with head and neck trauma: an analysis from a German highest level trauma center 2007-2023.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPanfacial fractures represent the most severe injuries to the face. The combination of these fractures determines the treatment strategy. This study aims to retrospectively review the data of adult patients treated for complex facial skull fractures in a hospital in Dortmund, Germany from 2015-2017. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe extracted related patient data from the hospital electronic repository and reviewed the patient files and radiological images. The fractures were classified based on the AO-Classification. The statistical analysis was performed by descriptive statistical methods. The main goal was to determine the most common fracture combinations.
resultsA total of 188 patients with panfacial fractures were identified (181 adults, 7 children and adolescents). The gender and age distribution corresponded to the international literature (male-to-female ratio: 3.1:1, most common injuries among young men). 2-9 fracture sites were identified per patient, resulting in a fracture frequency of 3.13 per patient. 69 different fracture combinations have been identified. The most common ones were combinations of lateral and central mid-face fractures, and combinations of nasal bone fractures with lateral midface fractures or nasal bone fractures combined with mandibular fractures. Between 1 and 13 osteosynthesis implants per patient were used for osteosynthesis; the most commonly used plates were 2.0 mm and 1.5 mm straight plates. The average inpatient stay was 3 days (standard deviation [SD] = 3.0 days), and the average operation time (incision to suture) was 39.5 min (SD = 53.5 min). DISCUSSION: Panfacial fractures are the most complex maxillofacial injuries. The complication rate in this study (4.5%) is below the international data. The treatment of panfacial fractures requires designated centers with experienced teams and good interdisciplinary cooperation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.