ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Neurosensory Recovery of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve After Open and Closed Reduction for Mandibular Fractures: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTraumatic mandibular fractures are the most common fractures of the facial region and are associated with loss of neurosensation in the inferior alveolar nerve (IAN). The present study aimed to compare IAN recovery after traumatic mandibular fractures between the open and closed reduction methods. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 90 patients with traumatic mandibular fractures of the body, angle, and symphysis, divided into two groups of 45 patients: group 1 was treated with closed reduction and fixation with rich arch-bar fixation under local anesthesia, and group 2 was treated with open reduction and rigid internal fixation with 2-mm titanium mini plates and monocortical screws (6 mm), and the plate was fixed to the fractured bony fragments. All patients underwent neurosensory testing using the Zuniga and Essick algorithm at baseline (preoperative), one week after surgery (postoperative), at three months, and at six months of follow-up.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed in IAN recovery between the groups. The most common site of fracture was the body (44% in group 1 and 56% in group 2). The maximum recovery was observed in the younger age group (25-30 years). At baseline, functional nerve recovery was observed in 40 cases (88%) in group 1 and 38 cases (84%) in group 2, and the difference was not statistically significant. Levels A and B tests were affected by surgical management and improved after three months. The total recovery in group 1 ranged from 60% to 80%, and that in group 2 ranged from 56% to 72%.
conclusionBased on the findings of the current study, both methods are recommended for surgical management of traumatic mandibular fractures with IAN recovery in 60-80% of cases six months postoperatively.
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.