Comparison of Crevicular vs Vestibular incision for postoperative complications in Symphysis and parasymphysis fracture

Main Article Content

Srinidhi Kasthurirengan
Mahathi Neralla
Senthil Murugan Pandurangan
Dinesh Prabu M
Murugesan Krishnan
Purva Kulkarni


Crevicular incision, Vestibular incision, Symphysis fracture, Parasymphysis fracture, Open reduction and Internal fixation, Quality of life, Innovation


Aim: To compare crevicular and vestibular incisions in postoperative complications in symphysis and parasymphysis fracture.
Materials and methods: This clinical trial involved 12 patients with mandibular symphysis and parasymphysis fractures which were divided into two groups of 6 each; Group 1-Crevicular incision(Test group) and Group 2 – Vestibular incision(Control group). Patients were randomly allocated to control and study groups. The fractures were approached using the routine vestibular incision in the control group and the crevicular incision with vertical release in the study group. The postoperative swelling, pre and postoperative mouth opening and the neurosensory disturbances.
Results: The study group demonstrated favourable surgical outcomes in the immediate postoperative phase as compared to the control group. The difference in mouth opening, swelling and neurosensory impairment between the two groups was found to be statistically significant.
Conclusion: Crevicular incision was found to be an ideal alternative to a vestibular incision in achieving surgical access and fixation of the mandibular symphysis and parasymphysis fractures with a reduction in postoperative patient discomfort and better surgical outcome.

Abstract 270 | PDF Downloads 109


1. Ellis E 3rd, Moos KF, el-Attar A. Ten years of mandibular fractures: an analysis of 2,137 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1985;59:120–9.
2. Pu AW, Professor, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, India. Incidence of maxillofacial trauma and its management - A retrospective study. Int J Dent Oral Sci 2020:1054–7.
3. Kandamani J, Gouthaman SS, Ramakrishnan DS, Kumar MPS, Muthusekar MR. Evaluation of effect of submucosal administration of depomedrol in management of postoperative sequelae in mandibular fractures: A randomized clinical trial study. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2022;13:84–9.
4. Abhinav RP, Selvarasu K, Maheswari GU, Taltia AA. The Patterns and Etiology of Maxillofacial Trauma in South India. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2019;9:114–7.
5. Huelke DF. Mechanics in the production of mandibular fractures: A study with the “stresscoat” technique. I. symphyseal impacts. J Dent Res 1961;40:1042–56.
6. Ehrenfeld M, Manson PN, Prein J. Principles of Internal Fixation of the Craniomaxillofacial Skeleton. Thieme; 2012.
7. Ristow O, Hohlweg-Majert B, Kehl V, Koerdt S, Hahnefeld L, Pautke C. Does elastic therapeutic tape reduce postoperative swelling, pain, and trismus after open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular fractures? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;71:1387–96.
8. Pradeep, Associate professor, Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Saveetha Dental college & Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University. Incidence of plate removal in maxillofacial region :A single centred retrospective study. Int J Dent Oral Sci 2021:3387–92.
9. Orringer JS, Barcelona V, Buchman SR. Reasons for removal of rigid internal fixation devices in craniofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg 1998;9:40–4.
10. Website n.d.
11. Tay ABG, Lai JB, Lye KW, Wong WY, Nadkarni NV, Li W, et al. Inferior Alveolar Nerve Injury in Trauma-Induced Mandible Fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015;73:1328–40.
12. Sensory disturbances associated with rigid internal fixation of mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991;49:1264–8.
13. Website n.d.
14. Seemann R, Schicho K, Wutzl A, Koinig G, Poeschl WP, Krennmair G, et al. Complication rates in the operative treatment of mandibular angle fractures: a 10-year retrospective. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:647–50.
15. Website n.d.
16. Website n.d.
17. Website n.d.
18. Rigid internal fixation of mandibular fractures: An analysis of 270 fractures treated using the AO/ASIF method. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1992;21:65–9.
19. Ravikumar C, Bhoj M. Evaluation of postoperative complications of open reduction and internal fixation in the management of mandibular fractures: A retrospective study. Indian J Dent Res 2019;30:94–6.
20. Website n.d.
21. Wahab PUA, Madhulaxmi M, Senthilnathan P, Muthusekhar MR, Vohra Y, Abhinav RP. Scalpel Versus Diathermy in Wound Healing After Mucosal Incisions: A Split-Mouth Study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;76:1160–4.
22. Sunar S, Santhanam A, Raj S S. Position and symmetry of mental foramen in orthopantomogram (OPG) - A retrospective observational study. Int J Life Sci Pharma Res 2020;11:1960–4.
23. Kavarthapu A, Thamaraiselvan M. Assessing the variation in course and position of inferior alveolar nerve among south Indian population: A cone beam computed tomographic study. Indian J Dent Res 2018;29:405–9.
24. Jeevitha M, Prabhahar CS, Reddy MN, Vijay VK, Navarasu M, Umayal M. Clinical Evaluation of Lateral Pedicle Flap Stabilized with Cyanoacrylate Tissue Adhesive: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Contemp Clin Dent 2022;13:24–9.
25. Guhan BB, Krishnaswamy VK, Karthikeyan GR, Mohan AM. Utilization of non-vascularized bone graft with regional flap as an alternative for facial reconstruction. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2022;13:143–6.
26. Harini, Selvarasu K, Krishna B. A retrospective analysis on types of flap design used in maxillary carcinoma. Int J Curr Res Rev 2020:105–9.
27. Balasubramanian S, Panneerselvam E, Gopi G, Prabhu Nakkeeran K, Rajendra Sharma A, Raja Vb K. Comparison of two incisions for open reduction and internal fixation of mandibular body fractures: A randomised controlled clinical trial evaluating the surgical outcome. Chin J Traumatol 2019;22:34–40.