Open surgical approach to fractures of the mandibular condyle: surgical technique and associated complications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/aim: This study evaluates anatomical reduction and rigid internal fixation of mandibular condyle fractures using the preauricular retroparotid approach. It also discusses advantages, deficiencies, and associated complications of the technique. Materials and methods: This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of a total of 52 mandibular condyle fractures from 42 patients who were treated with open surgery using the preauricular retroparotid approach between January 2019 and January 2024. Preoperative and postoperative assessments included measurements of mouth opening (maximum interincisal distance), vertical mandibular movement, and facial paralysis. Moreover, the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was used to evaluate scar quality at the surgical site. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographics, preoperative findings, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Anterior open bite was the most common finding, detected in 83% of the patients before surgery. The mean mouth opening of the patients increased significantly from 29 ± 4.94 mm to 37.76 ± 2.12 mm. Vertical mandibular movement exceeding 4 cm was a finding in more than half (52.3%) of the patients. The mean VSS score, indicating scar quality, was 1.64 ± 0.70, suggesting overall good cosmetic outcomes. Plate breakage in two patients was noted as a complication during follow-up. Conclusion: Several surgical techniques have been described for mandibular condyle fractures, each with its own benefits and limitations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".