Treatment of Severely Atrophic Edentulous Mandible Fractures: Load-Bearing or Load-Sharing?

Abstract

Several nonsurgical and surgical techniques have been employed to treat fractures of the severely atrophic mandible. The aim of this study was to analyze the repair outcome of these fractures. From 2010 to 2016, patients with fractures of the severely atrophic mandible were included. All files were retrospectively studied. Twelve patients (mean age: 76 years; female, n = 8) with a single (n = 6) or multiple fracture(s) of the atrophic edentulous mandible (mean height was 10.1 mm) were identified. Fracture occurred following trauma (n = 9), explantation of dental implants (n = 2), and placing an overdenture bar (n = 1). In seven cases, consolidation was successful following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using a load-bearing reconstruction plate. In five cases, the initial treatment was different: conservative treatment, using gunning splint, and performing ORIF using miniplates. In all five cases, additional ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate was needed. In four cases, short dental implants were placed several months following fracture repair. In case of a severely atrophic mandibular fracture, the authors advise ORIF with a load-bearing reconstruction plate. In selected cases, secondary oral rehabilitation with short dental implants and implant-supported prosthesis is feasible.

Keywords

mandible edentulous atrophic fracture treatment

Fractures of the severely atrophic mandible can occur following trauma, peri-implantitis, or explantation.1 2 3 4 Patients with fractures of the atrophic mandible are generally older and present with more medical conditions. Several nonsurgical and surgical techniques have been employed to treat fractures of the atrophic (edentulous) mandible, including bone grafts, titanium mesh, gunning splint, transoral open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with miniplates, and ORIF with a load-bearing reconstruction plate using an extraoral approach.3 5 6 7 8 9 10 A conservative treatment can be considered for patients who are medically too compromised for general anesthesia, but only if spontaneous healing is expected. Complications such as nerve damage, infection, dehiscence, and nonunion may occur.2 11 12 If the height of the mandible is less than 10 mm, complications are more likely to occur.12 13

A Cochrane review failed to ascertain a specific treatment option and argued this choice should be based on the patient's characteristics and clinician's experience.14 The aim of this study is to analyze the outcome of fracture treatment of the atrophic edentulous mandible in our center.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was performed. From December 2010 to February 2016, all patients with fractures of the severely atrophic edentulous mandible in the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, were included. We defined the mandible as severely atrophic if the height of the symphysis of the mandible was 15 mm or less. All files were retrospectively studied. Patients with osteoradionecrosis of the mandible were excluded.

Results

Twelve patients (female, n = 8) with single (n = 6) or multiple fracture(s) (n = 6) of the atrophic edentulous mandible were identified. The mean age was 76 years (range: 58–94 years) (Table 1).

Table 1

Patient characteristics

Number of patients	12
Male	4
Female	8
Mean age (y)	76.5 (58–94)

The mean height of the mandible was 10.1 mm as measured in the symphysis (range: 6.4–15 mm). All fractures occurred in the body of the mandible. The mean follow-up was 11 months (range: 1–41 months).

In seven cases, consolidation was successful following ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate and locking screws via an extraoral approach (Figs. 1 and 2, Table 2). No bone grafts were used. The mean time registered between the traumatic event and fracture reduction was 6 days (range: 1–12 days). Fractures occurred in six cases following trauma and in one case following explantation of dental implants. In four cases, a bilateral fracture of the mandible occurred and in three cases a unilateral fracture occurred. In two cases, short dental implants were placed 4 to 7 months following fracture repair (height symphysis > 10 mm) (Fig. 3). Satisfactory dental rehabilitation was accomplished in five cases. In two cases, follow-up of the fracture and dental rehabilitation was organized in another hospital and the outcome is therefore unknown to the investigators.

Table 2

Fracture characteristics

Patient	Cause of fracture	Height symphysis (mm)	Fracture site (region)	Initial treatment	Final treatment	Dental rehabilitation with implants	Complications
1	Trauma	10.3	33 and 43	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		Yes. Postoperatively 2 implants were placed	Hypoesthesia mental nerve
2	Explantation	10.5	41	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		Yes. Postoperatively 3 implants and an overdenture bar were placed	None
3	Trauma	6.9	33 and 43	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)	Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)
4	Trauma	14.0	44	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		No	None
5	Trauma	6.6	36 and 41	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)	Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)
6	Trauma	13.5	33	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		Three implants remained in situ	None
7	Trauma	8.0	35 and 45	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate		No	Hypoesthesia mental nerve (left side)
8	Placing an overdenture bar	6.4	32	Gunning splint	ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate	Three times implants were placed. Unfortunately, the implants needed to be removed	Hypoesthesia mental nerve Failure of osseointegration
9	Trauma	14.5	36 and 46	Observational policy because of using risedronate	ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate	Four implants were preserved. An overdenture bar was placed	Hypoesthesia mental nerve (left side)
10	Explantation implant in region 33	11.6	32	ORIF using 2 miniplates	ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate	An implant will be placed in region 33	None
11	Trauma	11.3	35	ORIF using 2 miniplates	ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate	Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)	None
12	Trauma	7.4	35, 43, and 46	ORIF using 5 miniplates	ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate	Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)	Unknown (follow-up in another hospital)

Abbreviation: ORIF, open reduction and internal fixation.

Fig. 1

Orthopantomogram of patient 2. Fracture of region 43 after explantation.

Fig. 2

Orthopantomogram of patient 2. Reconstruction plate situated on the mandible.

Fig. 3

Orthopantomogram of patient 2. Reconstruction plate situated on the mandible with two implants and an overdenture bar.

Four months following removal of an implant 32, a fracture occurred after rehabilitation with an overdenture on the remaining fixtures 34, 42, and 44 (patient 8, Table 2). The patient was treated with a gunning splint due to a medical history of stomach carcinoma and mitral valve insufficiency. Nonunion of the fracture occurred. The three remaining implants were removed gradually over time (8 months). After 13 months, ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate and locking screws from an extraoral approach was initiated. Dental rehabilitation occurred 7 months later, with implants (6 mm) 33 and 43. Unfortunately, the osseointegration of implant 43 failed three times, and implant 33 failed in the end as well (12 months after placement). Conventional dentures without dental implants were advised and implemented. A hypoesthesia of the mental nerve persisted.

One patient had used bisphosphonates (risedronate) for 4 years (patient 9, Table 2). Following trauma, bilateral fractures of the mandible occurred (symphyseal height: 14.5 mm). An observational treatment was performed; however, nonunion of the fracture on the left side occurred. After 3 months, ORIF, using a load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws via an extraoral approach, was performed. Four implants 33, 31, 41, and 43 remained in situ and an overdenture bar was placed after 6 months. Good dental rehabilitation was accomplished. A hypoesthesia of the mental nerve on the left side persisted.

Following explantation of an implant 33, a fracture of the mandible occurred (patient 10, Table 2). The symphyseal height was 11.6 mm and an implant 43 was situated. The initial treatment consisted of ORIF using two miniplates which was performed in another hospital. Malunion of the fracture occurred. After 18 months, the patient was referred to our center. ORIF, using a load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws from an extraoral approach, was performed. An implant 33 will be placed to accomplish good dental rehabilitation.

Following trauma, a fracture on the left side of the mandible occurred (symphyseal height: 11.3 mm) (patient 11, Table 2). Initial treatment consisted of ORIF using two miniplates which was performed in another hospital. Malunion of the fracture occurred. After 6 weeks, the patient was referred to our center. ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws from an extraoral approach was performed. Dental rehabilitation was accomplished without implants.

Multiple fractures of the severely atrophic edentulous mandible (symphyseal height: 7.4 mm) occurred following trauma (patient 12, Table 2). The initial treatment was ORIF using five miniplates via an intraoral approach. Due to unsuccessful healing at the fracture site, a load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws from an extraoral approach was performed and the consolidation was uneventful. The final dental rehabilitation is unknown to the investigators as the follow-up was performed elsewhere.

Complications of ORIF using a reconstruction plate included damage of the mental nerve (n = 4, patients 1, 7, 8, and 9). In one patient, osseointegration of implants failed (patient 8). No damage of the facial nerve was observed.

Discussion

Our case series and review of the literature show that using a load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws from an extraoral approach leads to a good consolidation of a fractured severely atrophic mandible.2 6 7 10 Complications following ORIF using a reconstruction plate occurred in four patients (permanent hypoesthesia mental nerve). No nonunion or malunion was seen in our case series. However, malunion following ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate from an extraoral approach has been reported in the literature. In this case, the initial treatment consisted of the application of miniplates that led to malunion.15 Disadvantages of using the load-bearing reconstruction plates are the requirement for general anesthesia and an extraoral scar. An intraoral approach with exposure of the mandible from angle to angle may further compromise the vascularization of the bone, which is already weak. This approach is therefore not advisable. Via an extraoral approach, more visibility is achieved and the bone fragments can be repositioned and stabilized with temporary miniplates on the caudal side of the mandible facilitating the application of the reconstruction plate on the buccal site. These miniplates can be removed when the reconstruction plate is positioned. With regard to deciding which position is best for the load-bearing reconstruction plate, it has been found that there are no mechanical differences when placing the plate on the buccal or inferior rim of the mandible.16

Following observation and using a gunning splint, malunion or nonunion are the main complications which were observed in our clinic and when studying the literature.5 17 Using miniplates for reconstruction of fractures of the severely atrophic mandible seems to be an attractive treatment option as it can be performed under local anesthesia and an extraoral scar can be avoided. However, nonunion may occur.5 6 15 Poor bone healing after a fracture of the atrophic edentulous mandible might be due to the bony reduction of the mandible and the relative increase of dense cortical bone leads to less vascularity and blood flow.7 18

Following loss of teeth, a continuous reduction of the mandible height over the years can be seen.19 20 Several studies have been performed with the aim to investigate how the mandible changes when becoming edentulous. It was found that the mandibular height decreased when edentulous patients grew older. The mandibular resorption rate was greatest in the earlier stages of edentulism and slowed with the longevity of edentulism.21 22 Being an elderly female or having asthma are found to be risk factors for mandibular atrophy.23 It has been reported that in edentulous jaws, implant-supported prostheses could prevent further resorption of the mandibular bone.24

In our case series, more fractures occurred in female patients and following trauma. Osteoporosis is a frequently seen problem in the older patient, with a predominance in females. In 2015 in The Netherlands, 43 of 1,000 females and 7.5 of 1,000 males were suffering from osteoporosis. The prevalence increases with age.25 Following minor trauma, fractures may occur in patients with osteoporosis, although most fractures occur in the spine, hip, wrist, humerus, and pelvis.26 Patients with osteoporosis have less mandibular bone mass and density and may be more often edentulous compared with patients who do not have osteoporosis.27 These changes in quality of bone as seen in osteoporosis are likely to contribute to the incidence of fractures of the atrophic edentulous mandible.27 28

In one patient with long term use of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis, a bilateral mandibular fracture occurred following trauma. Bisphosphonate or medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) is a well-known and described disease that seriously impairs the bone quality. Treatment of fractures in MRONJ-affected mandibles is difficult because outcome is unpredictable and treatment guidelines are not yet established.29 In the literature, it is advised that the initial approach should be as conservative as possible.30 In the case we have presented, the initial chosen policy (observation) led to nonunion (patient 9). In the literature, two cases were described in which initial treatment using miniplates did not lead to good rehabilitation.31 32 The more aggressive approach (ORIF using a load-bearing reconstruction plate) led to the healing of the fracture in these cases.31 32

It appears that mandibular implant-supported overdentures lead to less bone loss and possibly induce bone growth.24 Furthermore, function, pain, and psychosocial problems related to their dentures may improve with implants.1 33 To achieve optimal dental rehabilitation, implants should be considered even in severely atrophic edentulous mandibles. Although implant placement in these fragile mandibles are rarely complicated by a fracture, the burden for the individual patient is still considerably high. It has been described that in mandibles with less than 10 mm of height, the occurrence of fractures in conjunction with implant placement is low.1 3 Following implant placement or removal, atrophic edentulous mandible (symphyseal height: < 15 mm) fractures occurred in four cases (in a total of 916 patients; 0.44%).3 Another study reported that 0.05% of edentulous mandibles fractured in conjunction with implant treatment, and these fractures only occurred when the jaw was < 10 mm in height measured in the symphysis.4 More cases have been described in which a fracture of the (atrophic edentulous) mandible occurred following implant placement or removal.34 35 36 37 38 In our case series, fractures of the severely atrophic edentulous mandible were related to implants in 25% of the cases (explantation of dental implants [n = 2] and placing an overdenture bar [n = 1]). It is advisable to inform the patient preoperatively about the low risk of fracture when considering implants in the severely atrophic (edentulous) mandible.

Conclusion

Our case series and review of the literature show that in case of fractures of the atrophic (edentulous) mandible, the currently described treatments are not uniform. However, more complications with considerably higher burden for the patients are seen if ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate is not directly performed. In case of a severely atrophic mandibular fracture, we advise ORIF using load-bearing reconstruction plate with locking screws.39 In selected cases, secondary oral rehabilitation with short dental implants and implant-supported prosthesis is feasible.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

None.

Dutch Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Groningen, May 2016.

References

Chrcanovic

Custódio

Mandibular fractures associated with endosteal implants

Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009 13 04 231–238

Flores-Hidalgo

Altay

Atencio

, et al. Management of fractures of the atrophic mandible: a case series Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2015 119 06 619–627

Raghoebar

Stellingsma

Batenburg

Vissink

Etiology and management of mandibular fractures associated with endosteal implants in the atrophic mandible

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000 89 05 553–559

Soehardi

Meijer

Manders

Stoelnga

An inventory of mandibular fractures associated with implants in atrophic edentulous mandibles: a survey of Dutch oral and maxillofacial surgeons

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011 26 05 1087–1093

Santos

de Assis Costa

de Oliveira Costa

Souza

Júnior

de Melo

Failure of miniplate osteosynthesis for the management of atrophic mandibular fracture

J Craniofac Surg 2013 24 04 e415–e418

Bruce

Ellis

III

The second Chalmers J. Lyons Academy study of fractures of the edentulous mandible

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1993 51 08 904–911

Ellis

III Price

Treatment protocol for fractures of the atrophic mandible

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 66 03 421–435

Dharaskar

Athavale

Kakade

Use of gunning splint for the treatment of edentulous mandibular fracture: a case report

J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2014 14 04 415–418

Schug

Rodemer

Neupert

Dumbach

Treatment of complex mandibular fractures using titanium mesh

J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2000 28 04 235–237

10.

Franciosi

Mazzaro

Larranaga

Rios

Picco

Figari

Treatment of edentulous mandibular fractures with rigid internal fixation: case series and literature review

Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2014 7 01 35–42

11.

Wittwer

Adeyemo

Turhani

Ploder

Treatment of atrophic mandibular fractures based on the degree of atrophy–experience with different plating systems: a retrospective study

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006 64 02 230–234

12.

Luhr

Reidick

Merten

Results of treatment of fractures of the atrophic edentulous mandible by compression plating: a retrospective evaluation of 84 consecutive cases

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1996 54 03 250–254, discussion 254–255

13.

Luhr

Reidick

Merten

Fractures of the atrophic mandible: a challenge for therapy [in German]

Fortschr Kiefer Gesichtschir 1996 41 151–154

14.

Nasser

Fedorowicz

Ebadifar

Management of the fractured edentulous atrophic mandible

Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007 01 CD006087

15.

Broyles

Wallner

Borsuk

Dorafshar

The role of computer-assisted design and modeling in an edentulous mandibular malunion reconstruction

J Craniofac Surg 2013 24 05 1835–1838

16.

Madsen

Haug

A biomechanical comparison of 2 techniques for reconstructing atrophic edentulous mandible fractures

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006 64 03 457–465

17.

Pereira

Gealh

Barbosa

Filho

Different surgical approaches for multiple fractured atrophic mandibles

Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2011 4 01 19–24

18.

Mancini

Garcia

de Oliveira

de Freitas

Luz

Analysis of the blood supply to the post-fracture edentulous mandible: study by colour Doppler sonography

Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016 20 04 417–424

19.

Hutchinson

Farella

Kramer

Importance of teeth in maintaining the morphology of the adult mandible in humans

Eur J Oral Sci 2015

20.

Kovacić

Celebić

Zlatarić

, et al. Decreasing of residual alveolar ridge height in complete denture wearers. A five year follow up study Coll Antropol 2010 34 03 1051–1056

21.

Karaagaçlioglu

Ozkan

Changes in mandibular ridge height in relation to aging and length of edentulism period

Int J Prosthodont 1994 7 04 368–371

22.

Parkinson

Similarities in resorption patterns of maxillary and mandibular ridges

J Prosthet Dent 1978 39 06 598–602

23.

Xie

Ainamo

Tilvis

Association of residual ridge resorption with systemic factors in home-living elderly subjects

Acta Odontol Scand 1997 55 05 299–305

24.

Carlsson

Responses of jawbone to pressure

Gerodontology 2004 21 02 65–70

25.

Public health and care Osteoporosis > Numbers and Context > Current Situation. The Netherlands. 2015. Available at: https://www.volksgezondheidenzorg.info/onderwerp/osteoporose/cijfers-context/huidige-situatie

26.

Riggs

Melton

III

The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: insights afforded by epidemiology

Bone 1995 17(5, Suppl):505S–511S

27.

Kribbs

Comparison of mandibular bone in normal and osteoporotic women

J Prosthet Dent 1990 63 02 218–222

28.

Kribbs

Chesnut

III

Osteoporosis and dental osteopenia in the elderly

Gerodontology 1984 3 02 101–106

29.

Otto

Pautke

Hafner

, et al. Pathologic fractures in bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw-review of the literature and review of our own cases Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2013 6 03 147–154

30.

Rosella

Papi

Giardino

Cicalini

Piccoli

Pompa

Medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: clinical and practical guidelines

J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016 6 02 97–104

31.

Al-Osaimi

Samman

Al-Shakhs

Al-Suhaim

Ramalingam

An unusual case of atrophic mandible fracture in a patient with osteogenesis imperfecta and on oral bisphosphonate therapy: case report

Saudi Dent J 2014 26 02 68–73

32.

Madsen

Kushner

Alpert

Failed fixation in atrophic mandibular fractures: the case against miniplates

Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2011 4 03 145–150

33.

Stellingsma

Vissink

Meijer

Kuiper

Raghoebar

Implantology and the severely resorbed edentulous mandible

Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2004 15 04 240–248

34.

Kan

Lozada

Boyne

Goodacre

Rungcharassaeng

Mandibular fracture after endosseous implant placement in conjunction with inferior alveolar nerve transposition: a patient treatment report

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997 12 05 655–659

35.

Mason

Triplett

Van Sickels

Parel

Mandibular fractures through endosseous cylinder implants: report of cases and review

J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990 48 03 311–317

36.

Neyt

De Clercq

Abeloos

Mommaerts

Mandibular fractures following insertion of dental implants [in Dutch]

Acta Stomatol Belg 1993 90 04 251–258

37.

Rothman

Schwarz

Chafetz

High-resolution computerized tomography and nuclear bone scanning in the diagnosis of postoperative stress fractures of the mandible: a clinical report

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995 10 06 765–768

38.

Tolman

Keller

Management of mandibular fractures in patients with endosseous implants

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991 6 04 427–436

39.

AO Foundation. CMF Mandible. Edentulous atrophic fractures. Available at: https://www2.aofoundation.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/a1/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfGjzOKN_A0M3D2DDbz9_UMMDRyDXQ3dw9wMDAwCTYEKIvEocDQnTr8BDuBoQEi_l35Uek5-EtipkY55ScYW6fpRRalpqUWpRXqlRUDhjJKSgmIrVQNVg_Lycr30_Pz0nFS95Hy9zDxVA2yaMvKLS_Qj0NXqF-SGRlT5pIYDAGZzFhI!/dl5/d5/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS80SmlFL1o2XzJPMDBHSVMwS09PVDEwQVNFMUdWRjAwMFE1/?showPage=redfix&bone=CMF&segment=Mandible&classification=91-Special%20considerations&treatment=&method=Special%20considerations&implantstype=hidden&approach=&redfix_url=1285234127798