For proper recovery from craniofacial fracture, it is necessary to establish guidelines based on trends. This study aimed to analyze the patterns and causes of craniofacial fractures. This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent surgery for craniofacial fractures between 2010 and 2017 at a single center. Several parameters, including time of injury, region and cause of fracture, alcohol intoxication, time from injury to surgery, hospitalization period, and postoperative complications, were evaluated. This study analyzed 2708 fracture lesions of 2076 patients, among whom males aged 10 to 39 years were the most numerous. The number of patients was significantly higher in the middle of a month. The most common fractures were a nasal bone fracture. The most common causes of fracture were ground accidents and personal assault, which tended to frequently cause more nasal bone fracture than other fractures. Traffic accidents and high falls tended to cause zygomatic arch and maxillary wall fractures more frequently. Postoperative complications—observed in 126 patients—had a significant relationship with the end of a month, mandible or panfacial fracture, and traffic accidents. The present findings on long-term craniofacial fracture trends should be considered by clinicians dealing with fractures and could be useful for policy decisions.

Kim HS, et al. Restor Dent Endod. 2018 Aug;43:e42. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2018.43.e42

Sim HY, et al. Korean J Orthod. 2019 May;49(3):181-187. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2019.49.3.181

The association between dental health and coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a topic of debate. This study aimed to investigate the association between dental health and obstructive CAD using multiple dental indices. Eighty-eight patients (mean age: 65 years, 86% male) were prospectively enrolled before undergoing coronary CT angiography (n = 52) or invasive coronary angiography (n = 36). Obstructive CAD was defined as luminal stenosis of ≥50% for the left main coronary artery or ≥ 70% for the other epicardial coronary arteries. All patients underwent thorough dental examinations to evaluate 7 dental health indices, including the sum of decayed and filled teeth, the ratio of no restoration, the community periodontal index of treatment needs, clinical attachment loss, the total dental index, the panoramic topography index, and number of lost teeth. Forty patients (45.4%) had obstructive CAD. Among the 7 dental health indices, only the number of lost teeth was significantly associated with obstructive CAD, with patients who had obstructive CAD having significantly more lost teeth than patients without obstructive CAD (13.08 ± 10.4 vs. 5.44 ± 5.74, p < 0.001). The number of lost teeth was correlated with the number of obstructed coronary arteries (p < 0.001). Multiple binary logistic regression analysis revealed that having ≥10 lost teeth was independently associated with the presence of obstructive CAD (odds ratio: 8.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.80–35.64; p = 0.006). Tooth loss was associated with the presence of obstructive CAD in patients undergoing coronary evaluation. Larger longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether there is a causal relationship between tooth loss and CAD.

Sohn JB, et al. J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Dec;45(6):343-350. https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.6.343

The narrow alveolar ridge in the maxillary premolars area limits the angle of implant placement and the shape of the prosthesis. The aim of this study was to evaluate which implant prosthesis, screw-and-cement-retained prosthesis (SCRP) or cement-retained prosthesis (CRP), was more suitable for the maxillary premolar area. We conducted virtual implantation on 58 implant images from 47 patients obtained using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). The width and buccal inclination of the alveolar bone, the angulation of the implant fixture, and the angulation of abutment were measured and calculated. We determined that SCRP was feasible in 52% and 78.8% of first and second premolar areas, respectively. There was a positive relationship between the feasibility of SCRP and the premolar region in general (P = 0.031), although SCRP was more likely to be a possibility in the second premolar area. On multiple logistic regression analysis, the difference in the angle between the axis of the prosthesis and the axis of the alveolar bone (RA) was significantly associated with the type of prosthesis (P = 0.001). The RA was significantly higher for CRP implants (OR = 1.885; 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.70). SCRP is not always feasible in the maxillary premolar area, especially in the first premolar area. If the difference between the angle of the axis of the prosthesis and the axis of the alveolar bone is large, it may be necessary for the clinician to consider CRP in the treatment planning stage.