Osteosynthesis in the Surgical Treatment of Zygomatic Complex Fractures with Various Fixation Devices

Olena Astapenko; Nataliia Lytovchenko

doi:10.64124/DMR-2026-1-CRSR-1

Authors

Olena Astapenko Bogomolets National Medical University Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2168-9439
Nataliia Lytovchenko Bogomolets National Medical University Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6982-2764

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64124/DMR-2026-1-CRSR-1

Keywords:

polymer osteosynthesis, resorptive bone plate, osteosynthesis for zygomatic complex fracture, zygomatico-alveolar crest

Abstract

This article presents the results of clinical and radiological examinations to determine the choice of fixation device for osteosynthesis (resorbable titanium or polymer) in the zygomatico-alveolar crest area in cases of fracture.
Aim: To choose a method for fixing bone fragments in cases of fracture of the facial bones, depending on the location of the fracture line.
Materials and methods: Patients with fractures of the zygomatic complex bones.
Results: As a result of the research, the author determined different approaches to the use of various types of fixators. Thus, in cases of comminuted fractures in the zygomatico-alveolar crest area and the presence of a bone defect, a biodegradable polymer plate, as the sole way to fix bone fragments, is impractical because in this area, it is necessary to restore the buttresses.
Conclusions. The author recommends polymer-resorbable retainers for cases involving restoring structural integrity.

References

1. Yemineni, B. C., Mahendra, J., Nasina, J., Mahendra, L., Shivasubramanian, L., & Perika, S. B.(2020). Evaluation of maximum principal stress, von mises stress, and deformation on 221surrounding mandibular bone during insertion of an implant: A three-dimensional finite element study. Cureus, 12(7): e9430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.9430.

2. Varese, Ya. E. (2009). Indications for removing metallic mini plates in traumatology and reconstructive surgery maxillofacial. Ukrainian Dental Almanac, 12(2), 42–45.

3. Galatenko, N. A., Kuksin, A. M., Rozhnova, R. A., & Astapenko, O. O. (2008). Biodegrating action of bioactive material based on polyuretan-epoxy compositions as a carrier of drugs. The polymer journal. 2(30), 169–173. [Галатенко, Н. А., Куксін, А.М., Рожнова, Р.А., Астапенко, О.О. (2008). Біодеградуємий матеріал біоактивної дії на основі поліуретан-епоксидних композицій як носій лікарських речовин. Інститут хімії високомолекулярних сполук НАН України, Полімер. журн., 30(2), 168–172]. [in Ukrainian]. URL: https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/7291.

4. Malanchuk, V. О., & Astapenko, O. O. (2013). Application of bioresorbable polymeric bioactive action miniplates for osteosynthesis in fractures of the zygomatic complex. Herald of stomatology, (4), 68–72.

5. Malanchuk, V. О., Astapenko, E. A., Galatenko, N. A., et al. (2013). Results of the study of physical and mechanical biodegrading polymer properties, used in reconstructive bone surgery. Bulletin problems of biology and medicine, 2(100), 304–308.

6. Malanchuk, V., Logvinenko, I., Malanchuk, T., & Tsilenko, O. (2011). Surgical dentistry and maxillo-facial surgery (Vol. 2). Logos.

7. Prathigudupu, R. S., Tiwari, R. V., Mathew, P., Roy, B., Sadique, S., & Tiwari, H. (2018). Mortality in Maxillofacial Trauma. A Review. Saudi J Oral Dent Res, 3(7), 219–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21276/sjodr.2018.3.7.3.

8. Tami D. DenOtter; Johanna Schubert. (2021). Hounsfield Unit. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK547721/

9. Mehta R.; GP trainee, Chinthapalli K.; consultant neurologist. (2019). Glasgow coma scale explained. BMJ, 365: l1296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1296.

10. Javali, R. H., Krishnamoorthy, Patil A., Srinivasarangan M., Suraj, Sriharsha. (2019). Comparison of Injury Severity Score, New Injury Severity Score, Revised Trauma Score and Trauma and Injury Severity Score for mortality prediction in elderly trauma patients. Indian J Crit Care Med, 23(2), 73–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23120.

11. Syed, I., Joshi, A., Desai, A. K., & Anehosur, V. (2020). Occlusal Analysis Using T-Scan in Patients with Condylar Fractures When Managed by Closed Method. J Craniofac Surg, 31(5), e451-e459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006449.

12. Rallis, G., Mourouzis, C., Papakosta, V., Papanastasiou, G., & Zachariades, N. (2006). Reasons for miniplate removal following maxillofacial trauma: a 4-year study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 34(7), 435–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2006.07.001.

13. Aman, H., Shokri, T., Reddy, L. V., & Ducic, Y. (2019). Secondary management of midface fractures. Facial Plast Surg, 35(6), 640–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-3399494.

14. Mast, G., Ehrenfeld, M., Cornelius, C. P., Tasman, A. J., & Litschel, R. (2015). Maxillofacial fractures: midface and internal orbit-Part II: Principles and surgical treatment. Facial Plast Surg, 31(4), 357–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1563693.

15. Rothweiler, R., Bayer, J., Zwingmann, J., Suedkamp, N. P., Kalbhenn, J., Schmelzeisen R, et al. (2018). Outcome and complications after treatment of facial fractures at different times in polytrauma patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 46(2), 283–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2017.11.027.