PubMed · 2120355
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J I Cawood, P J Stoelinga. 1990. Facial trauma.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0901-5027(05)80386-8
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Facial injuries are common and require radiologic evaluation to plan treatment. The role of imaging is to detect fractures, describe their morphology and topography, and evaluate adjacent soft tissue damage. Computed tomography is the imaging method of choice for an accurate diagnosis and for depicting the complex anatomic structures of the maxillo-facial region. Magnetic resonance imaging plays a limited role, mainly in the assessment of lesions of orbital soft tissues. This paper reviews the most common traumatic injuries of facial bones, paranasal sinuses, orbits and mandible.
BACKGROUND: This paper describes the historical development as well as current concepts of frontobasal fracture treatment by maxillofacial surgeons. TREATMENT CONCEPT: Based on the experience of many years a diagnostic and therapeutic treatment concept was developed, which proved to be adequate in 320 patients with 90 frontobasal fractures in the last five years.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of computed tomography (CT) with conventional radiography in midfacial fractures. METHODS: The conventional radiographs (CM) and CT scans of 40 consecutive patients with complex midfacial fractures were assessed independently by two examiners. The number and site of fractures of the orbit, zygoma and maxilla were compared by the Wilcoxon Matched Pairs Signed Rank test. The best method for classification of the fracture was determined. RESULTS: Coronal CT (CCT) proved superior in the diagnosis of orbital fractures (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between any of the imaging methods for fractures of the zygoma. Axial CT (ACT) was the most effective method in imaging of maxillary fractures (ACT-CM; P<0.001, ACT-CCT; P<0.01). CCT was the most useful in classification of orbital and maxillary fracture. CONCLUSION: CCT is superior to CM for the assessment of complex midface fractures