Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
ISSN 1829-006X
2025; 10–16
Shared with The Gufo

MINIMALLY-INVASIVE VERSUS TRADITIONAL OPEN APPROACH IN MANDIBULAR FRACTURE FIXATION: A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Brijesh Gupta*, Pankaj Pathak, Swati Bansal, Shivani Adhikary, Ankita Sahare, Pranali Arya

Department · , Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Maharana Pratap College of Dentistry and Research Centre, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India · Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Maharana Pratap College of Dentistry & Research Centre, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India · Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Maharana Pratap College of Dentistry and Research Centre, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India

Received: 2026-04-10 · Published: 2025-12-21

© 2025 The Author(s) and the original publisher.

CC BY-NC 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Shared article.
Original title
MINIMALLY-INVASIVE VERSUS TRADITIONAL OPEN APPROACH IN MANDIBULAR FRACTURE FIXATION: A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Authors
Brijesh Gupta, Pankaj Pathak, Swati Bansal, Shivani Adhikary, Ankita Sahare, Pranali Arya
Source journal
Bulletin of Stomatology and Maxillofacial Surgery
Published
2025-12-21
Licence
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Original
https://doi.org/10.58240/1829006X-2025.21.12-10

Abstract

Background:Mandibular fractures are a common facial injury, and the treatment aims to restore both anatomical and functional aspects of the jaw. Traditional open surgery has been the standard approach, but minimally invasive techniques are emerging as alternatives, offering potential benefits in terms of healing time, complications, and recovery. This study compares the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery versus traditional open surgery in mandibular fracture fixation. Methods:A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 100 adult patients who sustained mandibular fractures requiring surgical intervention. Fifty patients were assigned to the minimally invasive surgery group and fifty to the traditional open surgery group. Primary outcomes included fracture healing time, postoperative complications, and functional recovery. Secondary outcomes included aesthetic satisfaction, postoperative pain, and patient satisfaction. Data were analyzed using statistical methods to compare the two groups. Results:The minimally invasive group had faster fracture healing (6.3 weeks vs. 7.1 weeks, p < 0.05), fewer complications (8% vs. 20%, p < 0.05), better functional recovery (38 mm vs. 32 mm mouth opening, p < 0.05), and superior aesthetic outcomes (VAS score 8.7 vs. 7.3, p < 0.05). Patients in the minimally invasive group reported lower pain levels and higher overall satisfaction (94% vs. 84%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Minimally invasive surgery for mandibular fracture fixation demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of healing time, complications, functional recovery, and patient satisfaction compared to traditional open surgery. This technique offers a promising alternative, particularly for patients where aesthetic outcomes and reduced recovery time are priorities. Larger, multicenter trials are needed to confirm these findings.
1 / ? 100% Open in new tab Download Cite

Loading the full text…

Download Follow Updates