Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

[Osteosynthesis in the mid-face and forehead area]

R Siegert1, A Löffler, A Speitling

  • 1Klinik für Hals-, Nasen- und Ohrenheilkunde, Schönkirchen/Kiel.

Laryngo- Rhino- Otologie
|July 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary

This study explored how different mini- and micro-plating systems perform in the mid- and upper-facial regions. The researchers measured pull-out forces of various screws and found that both bone and screw thickness influence stability. They also measured bone thickness in 10 skulls and found that all regions are suitable for osteosynthesis. Clinical data from 45 patients showed no complications related to the fixation systems used. The authors suggest that microsystems with 0.8 mm screws are best for nasoethmoidal fractures, while the Panfix system with 1.3 mm screws offers better strength and ease of use. For zygomatic fractures, miniplating with compression remains the preferred method. These findings help surgeons choose the right system based on anatomical and mechanical factors.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Barriers to accessing and using preventive mental health services for psychosocially strained children and families in Germany: Perspectives of professionals from different sectors.

Preventive medicine·2025
Same author

Factors associated with daptomycin consumption in French hospitals between 2019 and 2020: A nationwide surveillance study.

Infectious diseases now·2022
Same author

The PerPAIN trial: a pilot randomized controlled trial of personalized treatment allocation for chronic musculoskeletal pain-a protocol.

Pilot and feasibility studies·2022
Same author

Erratum to "Cluster binding studies with two anti-Thomsen-Friedenreich (anti-core-1, CD176) antibodies: Evidence for a quadruple epitope" [Int. Immunopharmacol. 72 (2019) 186-194].

International immunopharmacology·2021
Same author

Cluster binding studies with two anti-Thomsen-Friedenreich (anti-core-1, CD176, TF) antibodies: Evidence for a multiple TF epitope.

International immunopharmacology·2019
Same author

The role of microbiota and inflammation in self-judgement and empathy: implications for understanding the brain-gut-microbiome axis in depression.

Psychopharmacology·2019

Area of Science:

  • Maxillofacial surgery outcomes research within craniofacial medicine
  • Biomechanics of bone fixation in orthopedic and reconstructive surgery
  • Surgical implant design in biomedical engineering

Background:

Prior research has established that early facial osteosynthesis relied on thick plates, but modern systems include mini- and micro-plating options. It was already known that bone thickness varies across facial regions, and that screw design influences pull-out strength. However, no prior work had resolved how these variables interact in clinical settings. This gap motivated a study to clarify the differential indications of various systems for mid- and upper-facial osteosynthesis. The literature suggests that screw diameter and bone thickness are key factors in fixation strength. Yet, the clinical implications of these factors remain unclear. This uncertainty drove an investigation into how different systems perform in specific anatomical regions. The study aimed to provide practical guidance for surgeons selecting appropriate fixation systems.

Purpose Of The Study:

The aim of this study was to expand understanding of how different mini- and micro-plating systems perform in the mid- and upper-facial regions. The researchers propose that selecting the right system depends on both anatomical and mechanical factors. They wanted to measure pull-out forces of various screws to determine which designs offer optimal stability. Additionally, they sought to assess bone thickness in key facial areas to inform implant selection. The clinical experiences of 45 patients were summarized to validate these findings in real-world settings. The authors suggest that this approach could improve surgical outcomes by matching implant characteristics to anatomical needs. By combining mechanical testing and clinical data, the study aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for surgeons. This work addresses a gap in the literature by linking biomechanical properties to clinical applications.

Keywords:
facial osteosynthesisbone fixation systemsmaxillofacial surgerymicro-plating techniques

Frequently Asked Questions

The authors report that pull-out forces increase with greater bone and screw thickness, and are also influenced by screw design.

The authors suggest that microsystems with 0.8 mm screws, such as the Howmedica system, are suitable for nasoethmoidal fractures.

The authors propose that the Panfix system offers better holding strength and ease of use, especially when using 1.3 mm screws.

The authors suggest that miniplating with compression remains the preferred method for zygomatic fractures.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Methods:

The researchers conducted three distinct investigations to assess osteosynthesis systems. First, they measured the pull-out forces of seven different mini- and microscrews using standardized testing protocols. Second, they measured bone thickness at 11 anatomical points across 10 cadaveric skulls to determine regional variability. Third, they compiled clinical data from 45 patients who underwent mid- or upper-facial osteosynthesis. These data were analyzed to identify patterns in implant performance and patient outcomes. The pull-out force measurements were performed in controlled laboratory conditions to ensure consistency. The skull measurements were taken using calibrated imaging tools to capture precise dimensions. Clinical records were reviewed to assess complications and fixation success. The authors propose that this multi-faceted approach provides a comprehensive view of system suitability.

Main Results:

The pull-out forces of the screws increased with both bone thickness and screw diameter, according to the authors. The design of the screws had a substantial impact on their holding strength, as reported in the study. Bone thickness varied significantly across the mid- and upper-facial regions, but all areas were found to be suitable for osteosynthesis. No patient in the clinical sample experienced complications directly related to the fixation systems used. The 0.8 mm microscrews were found to be appropriate for nasoethmoidal fractures, as suggested by the authors. The Panfix system with 1.3 mm screws offered better holding strength and ease of use, according to the findings. For zygomatic fractures, the authors propose that miniplating with compression remains the preferred method. These results suggest that system selection should be guided by both anatomical and mechanical considerations.

Conclusions:

The authors conclude that system selection for mid- and upper-facial osteosynthesis should consider both anatomical and mechanical factors. They propose that microsystems with 0.8 mm screws are suitable for nasoethmoidal fractures. The Panfix system with 1.3 mm screws offers better holding strength and ease of use, according to the findings. For zygomatic fractures, the authors suggest that miniplating with compression remains the preferred method. The study suggests that bone thickness and screw design are key determinants of fixation stability. The authors do not claim that one system is universally superior, but rather that each has specific indications. They propose that clinical outcomes can be improved by matching implant characteristics to anatomical needs. These findings align with the authors' hypothesis that differential indications exist for various systems.

The authors report that no patient in the clinical sample experienced complications directly related to the fixation systems used.

The authors suggest that bone thickness varies across facial regions, but all areas are suitable for osteosynthesis with appropriate systems.