Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 15, 2025
Less-Invasive Technique for Non-stabilized Mandibular Fracture in Mouse Models
Published on: September 27, 2024
Endoscopic surgery versus open reduction treatment of mandibular condyle fractures: A meta-analysis
Samantha Cristine Santos Xisto Braga Cavalcanti1, Bianca Taufer2, Alex de Freitas Rodrigues3
1Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Prosthetics and Traumatology, School of Dentistry, Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Sao Paulo, Brazil; School of Dentistry, Centro Universitário Das Faculdades Metropolitanas Unidas (FMU), Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract:
The aim of the study was to compare open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) and endoscopic open reduction with internal fixation (EORIF) of condylar fractures (CF) in adults in terms of reducing both needing of reoperation and/or facial nerve injury. An electronic search was undertaken (PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and The Cochrane Library). The inclusion criteria were full text, published from their inception to June 2020, clinical trials, randomized or not, and retrospective studies, that compared ORIF and EORIF. The estimates of an intervention were expressed as the risk ratio (RR). From the 1338 articles found, 5 publications were included. There was no statistically significant difference between ORIF and EORIF regarding needing of reoperation (RR = 2.46, p = 0.42) or facial nerve injury (RR = 0.45, p = 0.14). Meta-analysis suggests that there is no difference between open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) and endoscopic open reduction with internal fixation (EORIF) of condylar fractures (CF) regarding facial nerve injury risk or need for reoperation.
