Article Sidebar

PDF
Issue: Vol. 561 No. 3 (2026)
Section: Các bài báo
DOI: 10.51298/vmj.v561i3.18575
Date Published: 11/08/2026
Views 29
Downloads 25
How to Cite
Ngô, T. M., Trần, T. T. Q., & Phan, H. P. (2026). SURGICAL OUTCOMES OF BILATERAL MANDIBULAR CONDYLAR FRACTURES AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 103. Vietnam Medical Journal, 561(3). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v561i3.18575

SURGICAL OUTCOMES OF BILATERAL MANDIBULAR CONDYLAR FRACTURES AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 103

Thế Mạnh Ngô1, Thị Thu Quỳnh Trần1, Hưng Phúc Phan1,
1 Bệnh viện Quân y 103, Học viện Quân y

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To describe fracture characteristics and evaluate surgical outcomes of bilateral mandibular condylar fractures at Military Hospital 103.


Methods: A prospective, non-controlled descriptive study was conducted on 31 patients (62 condyles) with bilateral mandibular condylar fractures treated surgically at the Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Military Hospital 103. Outcomes were assessed at early postoperative follow-up and at 6 months based on clinical and radiographic criteria.


Results: Condylar head fractures accounted for 77.4%; high-displacement fractures were found in 74.2% of condyles. Bilateral surgery was indicated in 54.8% of patients; titanium miniplate fixation and lag screw fixation were the primary techniques. Postoperatively, 95.2% of condyles achieved correct anatomical position on radiograph. Facial nerve (VII) injury occurred in 25.8% of patients and salivary fistula in 3.2%; no hemorrhage or infection was recorded. At 6 months, good outcomes were achieved in 98.4%, fair in 1.6%, and no poor results were recorded.


Conclusion: Open reduction and internal fixation is an effective treatment for bilateral mandibular condylar fractures with a high rate of good outcomes at 6 months. Facial nerve injury is a notable complication requiring careful surgical approach selection and meticulous dissection.

Keywords

Bilateral mandibular condylar fractures, internal fixation, surgical outcomes, facial nerve, maxillofacial surgery

Article Details

References

1. Zide MF, Kent JN. (1983). Indications for open reduction of mandibular condyle fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 41(2):89-98.
2. Loukota RA, Eckelt U, De Bont L, Rasse M. (2005). Subclassification of fractures of the condylar process of the mandible. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 43(1):72-73.
3. Eckelt U, Schneider M, Erasmus F, et al. (2006). Open versus closed treatment of fractures of the mandibular condylar process: a prospective randomized multi-centre study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 34(5):306-314.
4. Al-Moraissi EA, Ellis E 3rd. (2015). Surgical treatment of adult mandibular condylar fractures provides better outcomes than closed treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 73(3):482-493.
5. Singh V, Bhagol A, Goel M, Kumar I, Verma A. (2010). Outcomes of open versus closed treatment of mandibular subcondylar fractures: a prospective randomized study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 68(6):1304-1309.
6. Arcuri F, Brucoli M, Baragiotta N, Benech R, Ferrero S, Benech A. (2012). Analysis of complications following endoscopically assisted treatment of mandibular condylar fractures. J Craniofac Surg, 23(3):e196-e198.
7. Ellis E 3rd, McFadden D, Simon P, Throckmorton G. (2000). Surgical complications with open treatment of mandibular condylar process fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 58(9):950-958.
8. Salgarelli AC, Anesi A, Bellini P, et al. (2013). How to improve retromandibular transmasseteric anteroparotid approach for mandibular condylar fractures: our clinical experience. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 42(4):464-469.