Eyelet Wiring V/S IMF Screws: A Comparative Evaluation Study

Abstract

Objectives- To evaluate in minutes the time taken in minutes required from the beginning of the IMF procedure to the end of both the
eyelet wiring as well as IMFSs; To record the intraoperative stability of both the groups in terms of device stability and IMF stability
after maxillo-mandibularfixation; To evaluate intraoperative complications; Intra operative occlusion also checked; Radiographs taken
post operatively to check for root perforations in case of IMFSs group.
Methodology: 30 patients of either genders with the age groups between 18-60 years reporting to the Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
department at a tertiary health care center, Igatpuri, Nashik for treatment of facial bonefractures were randomly selected for this study.
A standard Performa was used to collect the necessary information regarding each case after inclusion. Thirty patients divided into two
randomgroups are as follows: Group a – Eyelet wiring group and Group B – IMFSs group.
Results: The patient acceptance was better for Group B patients than compared to group A. 2/15m cases of IMFSs had root perforations
radiographically, however the teeth remained vital post operatively. Intra operative occlusion in all cases in group A as well as Group
B, Post operativeocclusion was present in all but 1 case each of group A and group B.
Conclusion: minimum risk of perforating glove was evident in the IMF screw whereas multiple glove perforation was noticed in the
eyelet wiring group. IMF screw modality of treating mandibular fractures requires a shorter period of time as compared to eyelet wiring.
Both groupshad 100% intraoperative occlusion, almost equivalent clinical stability and bone healing post- operatively.