Comparative analysis of closed versus open reduction and internal fixation in mandibular fractures: A prospective...

Mandibular fractures are among the most frequently encountered maxillofacial injuries. Yet, the optimal management strategy between closed and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) remains a topic of considerable debate, given differences in functional outcomes and complication rates. Therefore, it is of interest to evaluate and compare the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes of closed reduction (CR) using maxillomandibular fixation and ORIF using titanium miniplates in patients with isolated mandibular fractures. Eighty patients were randomly allocated into two groups-Group A (CR, n=40) treated with arch bar fixation for four to six weeks and Group B (ORIF, n=40) treated with titanium miniplates via intraoral or extraoral approaches - and followed for six months. The evaluated parameters included fracture union period, maximum mouth opening, masticatory efficiency, occlusal accuracy, complication rates, nutritional status and overall patient satisfaction. Thus, we show that while both methods achieve similar union and occlusal outcomes, ORIF provides superior functional rehabilitation and satisfaction, establishing it as the preferred choice when resources and expertise are available.