Search

Background: Naso-orbitoethmoid fractures associated with ipsilateral zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures are more challenging injuries than zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures alone. However, there is a paucity of information on this complex fracture pattern in the pediatric population. This study investigated the cause, treatment, and outcomes of combined zygomaticomaxillary complex and naso-orbitoethmoid fractures versus isolated zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures in pediatric patients., Methods: This was a 25-year retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients who presented to a single institution with zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. Baseline patient demographics and clinical information, and concomitant injuries, treatment/operative management, and postoperative complications/deformities were recorded and compared between patients with combined zygomaticomaxillary complex and naso-orbitoethmoid fractures and patients with isolated zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures., Results: Forty-nine patients were identified to have had zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures in the authors' 25-year study period, of whom 46 had adequate clinical documentation and follow-up. Seventeen patients had combined zygomaticomaxillary complex-naso-orbitoethmoid fractures, of whom six had panfacial fractures. Both patient groups (zygomaticomaxillary complex only and combined zygomaticomaxillary complex-naso-orbitoethmoid fractures) were similar in terms of demographics. However, a significantly greater proportion of combined fracture patients experienced postoperative complications compared to isolated zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture patients, even after excluding those with panfacial fractures (87.5 percent versus 35.3 percent; p < 0.001). Enophthalmos (37.5 percent) and midface growth restriction (37.5 percent) were the two most common complications/deformities in all combined fracture patients., Conclusions: High-impact trauma can lead to zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures with associated naso-orbitoethmoid fractures in children. This injury pattern was found to cause significantly greater postoperative morbidity than isolated zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures alone. Thus, pediatric patients presenting with this complex facial fracture pattern should be closely monitored., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Risk, II., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.)

Background: Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Wegener granulomatosis) is a rare disease that commonly starts in the craniofacial region and can lead to considerable facial disfigurement. Granulomas and vasculitis, however, can involve many other tissues (especially pulmonary and renal). Dermatologic and subcutaneous components can lead to malignant pyoderma., Methods: The authors describe a unique pathologic condition, where significant Le Fort type trauma was associated with subsequent development of granulomatosis with polyangiitis and malignant pyoderma. Successive operations to excise necrotic tissue and reconstruct the defects were followed by worsening inflammation and tissue erosions. Trauma and surgery in proximity to the eye and sinuses masked the initial clinical presentation and led to delay in diagnosis and disease progression. The resultant facial disfigurement and tissue loss were substantial., Results: Despite multiple confounding factors, accurate diagnosis was eventually established. This was based on persistence of sinus inflammations in the absence of infective agents, proven sterility of lung lesions, and antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positivity with proteinase 3 specificity. Skin lesion biopsy specimens were identified as pyoderma gangrenosum and later as malignant pyoderma. Institution of immunosuppressive therapy allowed successful control of the disease and wound healing. The resulting craniofacial destruction, however, necessitated facial vascularized composite allotransplantation., Conclusion: Recognition of this rare pathologic association is essential, to prevent delays in diagnosis and treatment that can lead to major craniofacial tissue loss., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, V.

Background: Treatment of facial fractures in the setting of open-globe injuries poses a management dilemma because of the often disparate treatment priorities of multidisciplinary trauma teams and the lack of prognostic data regarding visual outcomes., Methods: Patients in the University of Maryland Shock Trauma Registry sustaining facial fractures with concomitant open-globe injuries from January of 1998 to August of 2010 were identified. Odds ratios were calculated to identify demographic and clinical variables associated with blindness, and multivariate regression analysis was performed., Results: A total of 99 patients were identified with 105 open-globe injuries. Seventy-nine percent of injuries were blinding, whereas 4.8 percent of globes achieved a final visual acuity greater than or equal to 20/400. Blindness was associated with penetrating injury, increasing number of facial fractures, zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture, admission Glasgow Coma Scale score less than or equal to 8, and globe injury spanning all three eye zones. Fracture repair was performed more frequently (62.5 percent) and more quickly (average time to fracture repair, 4.5 days) in cases of primary globe enucleation/evisceration when compared with complete (21.2 percent; 8 days; p=0.35) or incomplete (42.9 percent; 11 days; p=0.058) primary globe repair., Conclusions: Penetrating injury mechanism and zone of eye injury appear to be better indicators of visual prognosis than facial fracture patterns. Given the high rates of blindness, secondary enucleation, and delay of fracture repair in patients that were not primarily enucleated, the authors recommend that orbital fracture repair not be delayed in the hopes of eventual visual recovery in cases of high-velocity projectile trauma., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Risk, III.

Background: Patients presenting with traumatic craniomaxillofacial fractures often have occult concomitant injuries. This study was designed to determine whether facial fracture patterns are associated with a particular constellation of concomitant head and neck injuries., Methods: A retrospective review of 4786 consecutive patients diagnosed with maxillofacial fractures at a dedicated urban trauma center from 1998 to 2005 was conducted; maxillofacial fractures and cervical spine injuries were grouped by dividing the craniomaxillofacial skeleton and cervical spine into thirds. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify associations between facial fractures and other traumatic injuries., Results: Among all patients with facial fractures, 461 (9.7 percent) also had cervical spine injuries and 2175 (45.5 percent) had associated head injuries. Fractures of the upper face were associated with increased likelihood of mid lower cervical spine injuries, severe intracranial injuries, and increased mortality rates. Unilateral mandible injuries were associated with an increased likelihood of having upper cervical spine injuries, whereas unilateral midface injuries were associated with basilar skull fractures and several intracranial injuries. Finally, bilateral midface injuries were associated with basilar skull fracture and death., Conclusions: Craniomaxillofacial fractures are commonly associated with head and cervical spine injuries that involve predictable patterns of force dispersion from the maxillofacial skeleton and transmission to the cranial vault and cervical spine. These results suggest that concomitant injuries should be investigated closely with distinct types of facial fractures.

Background: Orbital floor injuries can occur in isolation or in association with zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures. Volumetric computed tomographic measurements of affected orbits are investigated for utility in guiding management in these two groups., Methods: The medical records of all patients with craniomaxillofacial injuries (2003 to 2005) were reviewed. Of 522 total patients, 45 patients had isolated orbital floor fractures, 13 of whom underwent repair (29 percent), and 64 had zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures, 36 of whom underwent reconstruction (56 percent) and 10 of whom underwent orbital floor repair (16 percent). Radiographic criteria for floor exploration included 50 percent area fracture in isolated injuries and 10-mm estimated zygomaticomaxillary complex compression in zygomaticomaxillary complex-associated floor injuries. Volume measurements of the affected orbits were obtained and compared with the uninjured contralateral orbit., Results: Before treatment in the operative zygomaticomaxillary complex group, there was an average decrease in orbital volume of 18.3 percent. In the isolated orbital floor group, there was an average increase in orbital volume of 28.3 percent., Conclusions: Zygomaticomaxillary complex-associated orbital floor injuries can be compressive injuries associated with loss of volume, whereas isolated injuries generally result in volume expansion. Radiographic criteria are often considered in the decision to proceed with orbital floor exploration to avoid late enophthalmos. The literature suggests that a 20 percent change in orbital volume results in perceptible deformity. Therefore, a radiographic criterion of 50 percent floor area (28 percent volume increase) in isolated injuries may be too stringent; an estimated 10 mm of compression (18.3 percent volume change) is a reasonable operative criterion for floor exploration in zygomaticomaxillary complex-associated injuries.

To develop an understanding of the expected functional outcomes after facial trauma, a retrospective cohort study of patients with complex facial fractures was conducted. A cohort of adults aged 18 to 55 years who were admitted to the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center between July of 1986 and July of 1994 for treatment of a Le Fort midface fracture (resulting from blunt force) was retrospectively identified. Outcomes of interest included measures of general health status and psychosocial well being in addition to self-reported somatic symptoms. General health status was ascertained using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The Body Satisfaction Scale was used to define patient concerns about altered body image and shape. To determine whether complex maxillofacial trauma and facial fractures contributed to altered social interactions, the Social Avoidance and Distress scale was used. In addition, information about a patient, his or her injury, and its treatment were ascertained from the medical records. Using the methods described above, 265 patients with Le Fort fractures were identified. These individuals were matched to a similar group of 242 general injury patients. A total of 190 of the Le Fort patients (72 percent of those eligible for the study) and 144 (60 percent) general injury patients were successfully located, and long-term interview data were acquired.Le Fort fracture patients as a group had similar health status outcomes when compared with the group of general injury patients. However, when outcomes were examined by the complexity of the Le Fort fracture, the authors found that study subjects with severe, comminuted Le Fort injuries (group D) had significantly lower SF-36 scores (worse outcomes) for the two dimensions related to role limitations: role limitations due to physical problems and role limitations due to emotional problems (p < 0.05). SF-36 scores for all other dimensions except physical function were also lower for comminuted versus less complex Le Fort fractures, although differences were not statistically significant.Specifically, there was a direct relationship between severity of facial injury and patients reporting work disability. Of group C and D Le Fort patients (severely comminuted fractures) only 55 and 58 percent, respectively, had returned to work at the time of follow-up interview. These figures are significantly lower than the back-to-work percentage of patients with less severe facial injury (70 percent). When study participants were asked if they were experiencing specific somatic symptoms at the time of the interview that they had not experienced before the injury, a significantly larger percent of the Le Fort fracture patients (compared with the general injury patients) responded in the affirmative. Differences between the Le Fort fracture and general injury groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05) for all 11 symptoms. The percentage of patients reporting complaints increased with increasing complexity of facial fracture in the areas of visual problems, alterations in smell, difficulty with mastication, difficulty with breathing, and epiphora, and these differences reached statistical significance. Patients sustaining comminuted Le Fort facial fractures report poorer health outcomes than patients with less severe facial injury and substantially worse outcomes than population norms. It is also this severely injured population that reports the greatest percentage of injury-related disability, preventing employment at long-term follow-up. The long-term goal of centralized tertiary trauma treatment centers must be to return the patient to a productive, active lifestyle.