Types of Intermaxillary Fixation and Their Interaction With Palatine Fracture Reduction

Christian Pedemonte Trewhela*, Katherine Valenzuela, Luis Edgardo González Alarcón, Ilich Vargas Farren, Alfredo Noguera-Pantoja

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: To compare 3 types of intermaxillary fixation (IMF) and their behavior when subjected to tension forces in 3 study models with a palatine fracture feature. Materials and Methods: An experimental study of 3 identical acrylic models was performed. All had the same palatine fracture pattern on the maxillary midline. All were reduced with different IMF methods (ie, direct interdental wiring, Erich arch bars, and self-tapping screws). Tension forces were applied to the study models to observe the fracture line behavior. Results: IMF with direct interdental wiring did not cause significant separation of the fracture feature in the anterior or posterior sector. IMF with the Erich arch bars caused a 2-mm separation in the anterior sector and 0 mm in the posterior sector. The IMF with self-tapping screws caused a 3-mm separation in the anterior sector and 1 mm in the posterior sector. Conclusions: IMF using self-tapping screws resulted in the greatest separation of the fracture compared with the results with Erich arch bars and direct interdental wiring. IMF with self-tapping screws tended to displace the fracture lines by application of the vector furthest from the center of resistance.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2083.e1-2083.e8
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume77
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2019
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

© 2019 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Types of Intermaxillary Fixation and Their Interaction With Palatine Fracture Reduction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this