A Comparative Analysis of Outcomes After Reduction of Zygomatic Fractures Using the Carroll-Girard T-bar Screw

Purpose Several approaches are available for managing zygomatic fractures; however, each approach has its complications. Use of the Carroll-Girard T-bar screw (CGTS) can reduce complications because it reduces the number of approaches needed for reduction. This study aimed to analyze the efficiency of the CGTS compared with the 3-point approach. Methods A retrospective study was conducted by reviewing the computed tomography scans of 204 patients who underwent reduction surgery of Knight and North type 3, 4, or 5 zygomatic fractures from March 2009 to August 2017. Facial asymmetry, operative time, and complications were evaluated to compare 2 groups of patients: those who underwent CGTS and those who did not. Bilateral differences in the distance from the reference plane to the malar eminence in 3 dimensions based on computed tomography scans were used to calculate facial asymmetry. Results Among 204 patients, 91 were treated with CGTS whereas 113 patients underwent a 3-point approach. Bilateral differences in the position of the malar eminence and facial asymmetry were not statistically different in both groups. Operative time was not different in both groups. However, when patients with type 4 fracture were independently compared, the mean operative time was significantly shorter for the CGTS group. Wound dehiscence occurred in 11 patients (9.7%) in the 3-point approach group, compared with none in the CGTS group. None of the patients in the CGTS group complained of postoperative cheek scars over their incision sites. Conclusions This study revealed that CGTS is a useful and feasible instrument that can reduce the number of approaches for zygomatic bone reduction and help clinicians achieve satisfactory outcomes.