Search

This prospective study compared the sensitivity of panoramic tomography (zonography) and helical computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing 73 mandibular fractures in 42 consecutive patients and correlated the results with known surgical findings. The purpose of the study was to determine the optimal radiologic examination for the diagnosis and operative management of mandibular fractures. The attending surgeons' interpretations of panoramic tomograms and helical CT images in the axial plane were compared with the patients' known surgical findings. A series of questions assessed the relative contribution of these two radiologic examinations in formulating an optimal operative plan for each patient. In the 42 patients studied, the sensitivity of helical CT was 100 percent in diagnosing mandibular fractures; this compared with 86 percent (36 of 42) for panoramic tomography, in which significantly more fractures were missed (p = 0.0412). In the six patients with fractures not visualized, the operative management was altered because of the new fracture visualized on helical CT. Of the seven missed fractures, six were in the posterior portion of the mandible. Comparing fracture detection by region, seven fractures found on helical CT were not visualized on panoramic tomography. Helical CT improved the understanding of the nature of mandibular fractures by providing additional information regarding fracture displacement and comminution and by locating injuries missed using panoramic tomography. This study suggests that helical CT alone may be more diagnostic than panoramic tomography alone in evaluating mandibular fractures. Helical CT sufficiently demonstrated details of fractures in 41 of 42 patients; in one patient, the nature of a dental root fracture was better delineated by panoramic tomography.

Previous studies comparing the sensitivity between different radiological exams have concluded that conventional axial computed tomography (CT; nonhelical) is unsuitable in the assessment of mandibular fractures. Axial CT was shown to have a reduced sensitivity compared with plain radiographs and panoramic tomography because it missed nondisplaced fractures in the posterior portion of the mandible. Because the resolution of CT has improved from the time of these previous studies, the authors were interested in assessing whether axial CT (nonhelical) could now provide additional clinically useful information and enhance our understanding of mandibular fractures, beyond that obtained from panoramic tomography alone. In their study, 5 staff surgeons initially evaluated the panoramic tomograms and then the CT scans of 39 patients with 66 fractures. A series of four questions assessed the relative contribution of these two radiological exams in formulating an optimal operative plan for each patient. The authors found that axial CT provided supplementary information regarding missed fractures, comminution, and the exact size and degree of displacement of fracture fragments. This additional data could have changed the operative plan in a substantial proportion of patients (17 of 39). Axial CT demonstrated two missed parasymphyseal fractures (2 of 39 patients) that were not seen on these patients' panoramic tomograms. Axial CT also revealed undiscovered comminution or demonstrated fracture displacement more precisely in 39% of patients (15 of 39) and 24% of fractures (16 of 66). This study demonstrates that axial CT was clinically useful as an additional investigation to panoramic tomography. Axial CT helped elucidate further the nature of suspected mandibular fractures.