A review of cervical spine injury associated with maxillofacial trauma at a UK tertiary referral centre

Missed injuries associated with maxillofacial trauma

Background

Maxillofacial trauma in polytrauma settings is often associated with multiple injuries both trivial and life threatening, and their timely detection is the mainstay of definitive trauma management for preventing mortality and morbidity. Emergency management of all the patients reporting to our maxillofacial unit is either done by our center or they have been managed at the peripheral health care facility and relatively stable patient is referred to us. Anecdotally, we found inadequacies in transport methods, diagnosis, and detection of associated injuries in the patients referred to us from the peripheral health care facility. To substantiate our finding, this observational study has been planned.

Objective

To identify, diagnose, and document missed injuries associated with the maxillofacial trauma.

Materials and Methods

All the trauma patients referred to the maxillofacial unit directly from the peripheral health care facility during the period of October 2017 to March 2019 were included in this study.

Results

We observed a total of 270 patients having both pure maxillofacial trauma and patients having documented other injuries associated with maxillofacial injuries. In our maxillofacial unit, functioning as a secondary screen, head to toe clinical examination was performed to document any previously missed out injuries. Missed injuries diagnosed by us included spinal injuries, temporal bone fractures, fractures of the styloid process, and even head injury.

Conclusion

Frequent reassessment of trauma patients at all levels of trauma care and training health care personnel particularly those at peripheral health care facility and those involved in prehospital care are pivotal in managing the trauma patients in most efficient manner.

Concomitant Cervical Spine Injuries in Pediatric Maxillofacial Trauma: An 11 Year Review of the National Trauma Data Bank

PURPOSE

Craniofacial trauma with concomitant cervical fractures (CCFs) is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in the pediatric population. We aim to characterize its incidence, injury patterns, outcomes, and risk factors, along with identifying any association between mandible fractures and cervical injuries via the National Trauma Databank.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using National Trauma Databank records between 2007 and 2017 to identify patients equal or under the age of 18 years hospitalized for maxillofacial trauma and with recorded cervical injury. Variables of interest include age, gender, race/ethnicity, trauma type (blunt vs penetrating), Injury Severity Score, area involved, mechanism of injury, comorbid conditions, inpatient complications, and discharge disposition. Retrospective cohorts were separated by CCF status. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariable regression analysis was utilized, with P-value <.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 32,952 patients were included in the study, with the majority being White (60.8%), male (68.2%), and between the ages of 13 and 18 years (65%). Of these, 8.2% experienced CCF. Most common mechanisms of injury were motor vehicle trauma (32.6%), interpersonal violence (18.8%), and falls (13.5%). Univariate analysis revealed patients with CCF were significantly older (15.2 vs 12.9; P < .001), more likely to be motor vehicle occupants (46.6 vs 31.9%; P < .001), and suffer polyfacial fractures (62.6 vs 60.7%; P < .001). Longer length of stay (9.4 vs 3.6 days; P < .001) and significantly higher inpatient complications such as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, unplanned intubation, severe sepsis, pressure ulcer, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and unplanned return to operating room were observed in the CCF cohort. Female gender (1.5 [1.37 to 1.64; 95% confidence interval {CI}] P < .001) and higher Injury Severity Score (1.12 [1.11 to 1.11; 95% CI] P < .001) were associated with significantly higher odds on multivariable analysis. The presence of a mandible fracture was not associated with increased CCF on multivariate analysis (1.06 [0.92 to 1.22; 95% CI] P = .36).

CONCLUSIONS

There are statistically significant differences in demographics, outcomes, and injury patterns in maxillofacial patients with CCF that may help guide treatment. No association between mandible fractures and cervical trauma was identified.

Intraoperative Positioning in Maxillofacial Trauma Patients With Cervical Spine Injury - Is It Safe? Radiological Simulation in a Healthy Volunteer

Study Design

Observational.

Objective

To investigate the effects on the cervical spine of positioning patients for maxillofacial procedures by simulating intraoperative positions for common maxillofacial procedures.

Methods

Magnetic resonance imaging was used to assess the effects of head position in common intraoperative configurations - neutral (anterior mandible position), extended (tracheostomy position) and laterally rotated (mandibular condyle position) on the C-spine of a healthy volunteer.

Results

In the tracheostomy position, maximal movement occurred in the sagittal plane between the cervico-occipital junction and C4-C5, as well as at the cervico-thoracic junction. Minimal movement occurred at C2 (on C3), C5 (on C6) and C6 (on C7). In the mandibular condyle position, C-spine movements occurred in both rotational and sagittal planes. Maximal movement occurred above the level of C4, concentrated at atlanto-occipital and atlanto-axial (C1-2) joints.

Conclusions

Neck extension is likely to be relatively safe in injuries that are stable in flexion and extension, such as odontoid peg fracture and fractures between C5 and C7. Head rotation is likely to be relatively safe in fractures below C4, as well as vertebral body fractures, and laminar fractures without disc disruption. Early dialogue with the neurosurgical team remains a central tenet of safe management of patients with combined maxillofacial and C-spine injuries.

Factors associated with delays in medical and surgical open facial fracture management

Objectives

Open fractures are at risk of infection because of exposure of bone and tissue to the environment. Facial fractures are often accompanied by other severe injuries, and therefore fracture management may be delayed until after stabilization. Previous studies in this area have examined timing of multiple facets of care but have tended to report on each in isolation (eg, antibiotic initiation).

Methods

This was a retrospective study of adult patients admitted to five trauma centers from January 1, 2017 to March 31, 2021 with open facial fractures. Variables collected included demographics, injury mechanism, details on facial and non-facial injuries, facial fracture management (irrigation and debridement (I&D), irrigation without debridement, open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), antibiotics), and other hospital events. The study hypothesized that the presence of serious non-facial injuries would be associated with delays in facial fracture management. The primary aims were to describe open facial fracture management practices and examine factors associated with early versus delayed fracture management. A secondary aim was to describe infection rates. Early treatment was defined as within 24 hours of arrival for I&D, irrigation without debridement, and ORIF and within 1 hour for antibiotics.

Results

A total of 256 patients were included. Twenty-seven percent had major trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥16). The presence of serious head injury/traumatic brain injury was associated with delayed I&D (OR_early=0.04, p<0.01), irrigation without debridement (OR_early=0.09, p<0.01), and ORIF (OR_early=0.10, p<0.01). Going to the OR within 24 hours was associated with early I&D (OR_early=377.26, p<0.01), irrigation without debridement (OR_early=13.54, p<0.01), and ORIF (OR_early=154.92, p<0.01). The infection rate was 4%.

Conclusions

In this examination of multiple aspects of open facial fracture management, serious injuries to non-facial regions led to delays in surgical fracture management, consistent with the study hypothesis.

Level of evidence

Level III, prognostic/epidemiological.

Pattern of Facial Fractures and Its Association with a Cervical Spine Injury in a Tertiary Hospital in Jordan

BACKGROUND

Facial fractures can be accompanied by serious and life-threatening injuries such as cervical spine injury (CSI), which can lead to serious consequences if misdiagnosed.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the patterns of maxillofacial fractures and to explore the association between these fractures and cervical spine injuries (CSIs) in patients with a traumatic facial injury.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of the subjects who were admitted to the King Abdullah University Hospital (KAUH) and had a maxillofacial fracture in the period from January 2017 through December 2020. Stepwise binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to find the variables which are significantly and independently associated with CSIs.

RESULTS

A total of 394 maxillofacial fractures were reported for a total of 221 subjects. The mandible was the most common site of the reported fractures (41.88%). The majority of the subjects had associated injuries (70.6%), of which 82.7% were CSIs. The most common type of the CSIs was the vertebral fracture (52%). Increased age (OR = 1.543, P < 0.05), having a mandibular fracture (OR = 4.382, P < 0.01), and having a maxillary fracture (OR = 3.269, P < 0.05) were significantly associated with the presence of CSI.

CONCLUSION

The current study revealed that the most common type of facial fracture occurred in the mandible area, and CSI was the most common fracture-associated injury (82.7%). Increased age and having mandibular or maxillary fracture were associated with an increased risk of developing CSI. Therefore, it is necessary to rule out the presence of concomitant CSI during the emergency management of maxillofacial fractures, particularly for elderly patients and those with mandibular or maxillary fractures.

Cervical Spine Injuries and Maxillofacial Trauma: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Identify specific maxillofacial trauma patterns associated with cervical spine injuries.

METHODS

The protocol was developed according to (PRISMA-P) and was admitted to PROSPERO under accreditation code #CRD42020177816. Furthermore, the reporting of the present SR was conducted based on the PRISMA checklist.

RESULTS

Of the 1,407,750 patients recorded, a total of 115,997 patients (12.13%) had MFF with an associated CSI with a gender proportion (M:F) of 3.63:1 respectively. Motor vehicle accident was the most common cause of the combined Maxillofacial Trauma (MFT) and CSI. The most common CSI location was at the C2, followed by the C5 cervical spines. The most common location of a maxillofacial fracture resulting in a CSI was the mandible.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of the association of CSIs with MFT has been low (12.13%). Nevertheless, in cases of an isolated mandibular trauma due to a severe blow presenting with a low Glasgow Coma Scale, maxillofacial surgeons should be at a high alert of an associated CSI.

Fracture heat map of the facial skull demonstrates a danger zone of concomitant cervical spine injuries

Concomitant maxillofacial and cervical spine injuries occur in 0.8-12% of the cases. We examined the relation of injury localization and the probability of cervical spine fracture. A retrospective study was conducted on patients that have been treated at Dortmund General Hospital for injuries both to the maxillofacial region and to the cervical spine between January 1st, 2007 and December 31th, 2017. Descriptive statistical methods were used to describe the correlation of cervical spine injuries with gender, age as well as maxillofacial injury localization. 7708 patients were hospitalized with maxillofacial injury, among them 173 were identified with cervical spine injury. The average ages for both genders lie remarkably above the average of all maxillofacial trauma patients (36.2 y.o. in male and 50.9 y.o. in female). In the group of men, most injuries were found between the ages of 50 and 65. Whereas most injuries among women occurred after the age of 80. The relative ratio of cervical spine injuries (CSI) varies between 1.1 and 5.26% of the maxillofacial injuries (MFI), being highest in the soft tissue injury group, patients with forehead fractures (3.12%) and patients with panfacial fractures (2.52%). Further, nasal, Le Fort I and II, zygomatic complex and mandibular condyle fractures are often associated with CSI. Fractures next to the Frankfurt horizontal plane represent 87.7% of all MFI with concomitant CSI. Patients in critical age groups with a high-energy injury are more likely to suffer both, MFI and CSI injuries. Our findings help to avoid missing the diagnosis of cervical spine injury in maxillofacial trauma patients.

Cervical spine injuries in facial fracture patients - injury mechanism and fracture type matter

Evidence supports the notion that craniofacial fractures are significant predictors of cervical spine injuries (CSIs), but some debate remains on the injury mechanism of co-existing CSIs in craniofacial fractures and the relationship between CSI and specific facial fractures. In this retrospective study, we aim to assess the incidence rates of specific facial fracture types as well as other important variables and their relationship with CSIs. The primary outcome variable, CSI, and several predictor variables, including facial fracture type, were evaluated with logistic regression analyses. Of 2919 patients, the total CSI incidence rate was 3.0%. Rates of CSI in patients with isolated mandibular fractures (OR 0.26 CI 0.10, 0.63; p = 0.006) were lower than those previously reported, whereas isolated nasal fractures were strongly associated with CSI (OR 2.67 CI 1.36, 5.22; p = 0.004). Patients with concomitant cranial injuries were twice as likely to have CSI (OR 2.00, CI 1.22, 3.27; p = 0.006). Even though there is a strong occurrence rate of CSIs in patients with cranial injuries, clinicians should be aware that patients presenting with isolated facial fractures are at significant risk for sustaining CSIs also.

Maxillofacial Nursing: Assessing the Knowledge and Awareness of Nurses in Handling Maxillofacial Injuries Through a Comprehensive Survey

Aim

To assess the knowledge and awareness of nurses in handling maxillofacial injuries.

Method

A cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted among the staff nurses of the multi-specialty Gokul Newtech Hospital, Jamnagar, Gujarat. Forty nursing staff were included in the study. Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA, Spearman’s correlation and Mann–Whitney U tests were applied for statistical analysis.

Result

There was no statistically significant difference between the mean knowledge score concerning the study participant’s age, work experience, and education. According to the survey, a majority of the nurses either did not know the answer or answered incorrectly.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that there is a requirement of new guidelines and recommendations in the existing teaching and training modules being followed by the nursing schools across the country.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12663-019-01240-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Frequency of cervical spine injuries in patients with midface fractures

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the frequency and risk factors for cervical spine injury (CSI) in patients with midface fractures. Patients ≥18 years of age entered in the Massachusetts General Hospital Trauma Registry from 2007 to 2017 were identified. Those with a midface fracture, computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine, and complete medical records were included. There were 23,394 patients in the registry; 3950 (16.9%) had craniomaxillofacial fractures and 1822 (7.8%) had a CSI. Craniomaxillofacial fractures included fractures of the midface (n=2803, 71.0%), mandible (n=873, 22.1%), and midface plus mandible (n=274, 6.9%). The overall frequency of CSI in patients with midface fractures was 11.4% (350/3077). Patients with midface fractures had a higher risk for CSI compared to patients without a midface fracture (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 2.1-2.4, P<0.001). In a multivariate model, nasal and orbital fractures, chest injuries, age, injury severity score, and motor vehicle crash or fall as the etiology were independent risk factors for CSI. Mortality was two times higher in subjects with CSI. Early and accurate diagnosis of CSI is a critical factor when planning the treatment of patients with these fractures.

The Characteristics and Cost of Le Fort Fractures: A Review of 519 Cases From a Nationwide Sample

PURPOSE

The aims were to report the characteristics of Le Fort fractures and to quantify the associated hospital costs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From October 2015 to December 2016, the National Inpatient Sample was searched for patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of a Le Fort fracture. Predictor variables were drawn from demographic, admission, and injury characteristics. The outcome variable was hospital cost. Summary statistics were calculated and compared among Le Fort patterns. Univariate comparisons and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to determine predictors associated with cost.

RESULTS

A total of 519 patients were identified in this cohort. Associated injuries included skull fractures (28%), intracranial hemorrhage (13%), cervical spine injury (9.8%), and concussion (9.1%). Seventy-three percent of patients received open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for their facial fractures during their admission, 13% received a tracheostomy, and 10% were mechanically ventilated for at least 1 day. The ventilation (P < .01) and tracheostomy (P < .01) rates increased with Le Fort complexity, as did length of stay (LOS; P < .01), costs (P < .01), and charges (P < .01). The mean costs of treating Le Fort I, II, and III fractures were $25,836, $28,415, and $47,333, respectively. Increased cost was independently associated with younger age, male gender, African-American ethnicity, Le Fort II and III patterns, motor vehicle accident etiology, mechanical ventilation requirement, tracheostomy, ORIF, transfer to an outside facility, and increased LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of head injuries and the need for respiratory support substantially increased with Le Fort complexity. Hospital costs were not markedly influenced by the diagnosis and management of associated injuries. Instead, costs were predominantly driven by fracture complexity and the need for necessary procedures, such as ORIF, tracheostomy, and mechanical ventilation.

Risk Factors for Cervical Spine Injury in Patients With Mandibular Fractures

PURPOSE

Patients with mandibular fractures are known to be at risk of concomitant cervical spine injuries (CSIs). The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of and risk factors for CSIs in these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult trauma patients with mandibular fractures from June 1, 2007, through June 30, 2017. Patients were identified through the Massachusetts General Hospital trauma registry and were included as study patients if they had a mandibular fracture and computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine. The primary predictor variable was the site of the mandibular fracture; the primary outcome variables were the presence of CSIs and death. The other variables were demographic characteristics (age, gender, alcohol use, and drug use), Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale, presence of midface and extra-craniofacial injuries, and etiology. Data analysis consisted of univariate correlations and construction of a multivariate model to determine independent risk factors for CSIs.

RESULTS

Of 23,394 patients in the trauma registry, 3,950 (17%) had craniomaxillofacial fractures and 1,822 (7.7%) had CSIs. The frequency of CSIs in the overall cohort of mandibular fracture patients (n = 1,147) was 4.4%, and for admitted patients (n = 495), it was 10%. The mean age of patients with mandibular fractures plus CSIs was 40 years (range, 19 to 93 years); 84% were men. Patients with a ramus-condyle unit fracture, mandibular fracture plus any midface fracture, non-craniomaxillofacial injury, and motor vehicle crash etiology had the highest frequency of CSIs. Ramus-condyle unit fractures and chest injuries were independent risk factors for CSIs in the multivariate model (P = .0334 and P = .0013, respectively). The mortality rate was 4-fold higher in patients with CSIs versus those without CSIs.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of ramus-condyle unit fractures and the presence of chest injuries were independent risk factors for CSIs. Oral and maxillofacial surgeons should be diligent in ruling out CSIs in mandibular fracture patients.

Correlation between modified LEMON score and intubation difficulty in adult trauma patients undergoing emergency surgery

Background

Prediction of difficult airway is critical in the airway management of trauma patients. A LEMON method which consists of following assessments; Look-Evaluate-Mallampati-Obstruction-Neck mobility is a fast and easy technique to evaluate patients’ airways in the emergency situation. And a modified LEMON method, which excludes the Mallampati classification from the original LEMON score, also can be used clinically. We investigated the relationship between modified LEMON score and intubation difficulty score in adult trauma patients undergoing emergency surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed electronic medical records of 114 adult trauma patients who underwent emergency surgery under general anesthesia. All patients’ airways were evaluated according to the modified LEMON method before anesthesia induction and after tracheal intubation; the intubating doctor self-reported the intubation difficulty scale (IDS) score. A difficult intubation group was defined as patients who had IDS scores > 5.

Results

The modified LEMON score was significantly correlated with the IDS score (P < 0.001). The difficult intubation group showed higher modified LEMON score than the non-difficult intubation group (3 [2-5] vs. 2 [1-3], respectively, P = 0.017). Limited neck mobility was the only independent predictor of intubation difficulty (odds ratio, 6.15; P = 0.002).

Conclusion

The modified LEMON score is correlated with difficult intubation in adult trauma patients undergoing emergency surgery.

Airway management in a displaced comminuted fracture of the mandible and atlas with a vertebral artery injury: A case report

Complex cervical spine fractures are a serious complications of maxillofacial trauma and associated with high mortality and neurological morbidity. Strict vigilance in preventing further insult to the cervical spine is a crucial step in managing patients who are at risk for neurologic compromise. We report a rare case of a right transverse process of atlas fracture with right-sided vertebral artery injury that was associated with a comminuted fracture of the body and angle of the mandible, which restricted mouth opening. Airway management was performed by an awake fiber-optic nasotracheal intubation, where neck movement was avoided with a cervical collar. Vertebral artery injuries may have disastrous consequences, such as basilar territory infarction and death, and should be suspected in patients with head and neck trauma. After mandibular plating, the patient was on cervical collar immobilization for 12 weeks and anti-coagulant therapy.

Incidence and etiology of maxillofacial trauma: a retrospective analysis of King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital in the past decade

Background

Maxillofacial injury is a common injury in trauma patients. The incidence, associated injuries and causes have been never reported for King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital (KCMH).

Objectives

To report the incidence, associated injuries, age groups, treatments, and behavioral risks in maxillofacial patients who were admitted to KCMH in the past decade.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective descriptive analysis of patients from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2015, to evaluate the age groups, causes, sites of facial bone fracture, associated injuries, treatments, and behavioral risks.

Results

There were 1,275 patients (79% male and 21% female). The most common age group was 21–30 years (30.6%), followed by 11–20 years (19.5%) and 31–40 years (18.8%). The most common cause of injury was motorcycle accident (39.7%), and the most common associated injury was head injury (58%). The total number of fractures were 1,526, with the most common fracture site being the zygomaticomaxillary complex (38.6%), followed by mandible (21.8%) and nasal bone (17.8%). Most fractures were treated using open reduction and internal fixation with plates and screws.

Conclusions

The main cause of maxillofacial injury is motorcycle accident even though the government launched a policy named “Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011–2020” to reduce road traffic deaths. Thailand continues to need stronger law enforcement to reduce risky motorcycle driving behavior.

Imaging in traumatic mandibular fractures

A fracture of the mandible is a common trauma presentation amongst young males and represents one of the most frequently encountered fractured bones within the viscerocranium. Historically, assault was the dominant contributing factor but now due to the increased number of vehicles used per capita, motor vehicle accidents are the primary cause. Mandibular fractures can be classified anatomically, by dentition, by muscle group and by severity. The fracture may also be closed, open, comminuted, displaced or pathological. It is important that the imaging modality used identifies the classification as this will decide definitive treatment. X-ray projections have typically been used to detect a mandibular fracture, but are limited to an anteroposterior (AP), lateral and oblique view in an unstable trauma patient. These views are inadequate to detail the level of fracture displacement and show poor detail of the condylar region. Computer tomography (CT) is the imaging modality of choice when assessing a traumatic mandibular injury and can demonstrate a 100% sensitivity in detecting a fracture. This is through use of a multidetector-row CT, which reduces motion blur and therefore produces accurate coronal and sagittal reconstructions. Furthermore, reconstructive three-dimensional CT images gained from planar views, allows a better understanding of the spatial relationship of the fracture with other anatomical landmarks. This ensures a better appreciation of the severity and classification of a mandibular fracture, which therefore influences operative planning. Ultrasound is another useful modality in detecting a mandibular fracture when the patient is too unstable to be transferred to a CT scanner. The sensitivity however is less in comparison to a CT series of images and provides limited detail on the fracture pattern. Magnetic resonance imaging demonstrates use in assessing soft tissue injury of the temporomandibular joint but this is unlikely to be of priority when initially assessing a trauma patient.

Maxillofacial trauma - Underestimation of cervical spine injury

Undiagnosed cervical spine injury can have devastating results. The aim of this study was to analyse patients with primary maxillofacial trauma and a concomitant cervical spine injury. It is hypothetised that cervical spine injury is predictable in maxillofacial surgery. A monocentric clinical study was conducted over a 10-year period to analyse patients with primary maxillofacial and associated cervical spine injuries. Demographic data, mechanism of injury, specific trauma and treatments provided were reviewed. Additionally a search of relevant international literature was conducted in PubMed by terms "maxillofacial" AND "cervical spine" AND "injury". Of 3956 patients, n = 3732 (94.3%) suffered from craniomaxillofacial injuries only, n = 174 (4.4%) from cervical spine injuries only, and n = 50 (1.3%) from both craniomaxillofacial and cervical spine injuries. In this study cohort the most prevalent craniofacial injuries were: n = 41 (44%) midfacial and n = 21 (22.6%) skull base fractures. Cervical spine injuries primarily affected the upper cervical spine column: n = 39 (58.2%) vs. n = 28 (41.8%). Only in 3 of 50 cases (6%), the cervical spine injury was diagnosed coincidentally, and the cervical spine column was under immobilised. The operative treatment rate for maxillofacial injuries was 36% (n = 18), and for cervical spine injuries 20% (n = 10). The overall mortality rate was 8% (n = 4). The literature search yielded only 12 papers (11 retrospective and monocentric cohort studies) and is discussed before our own results. In cases of apparently isolated maxillofacial trauma, maxillofacial surgeons should be aware of a low but serious risk of underestimating an unstable cervical spine injury.